Hard News by Russell Brown

Read Post

Hard News: To be expected

163 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Newer→ Last

  • Moz, in reply to Russell Brown,

    Oh, come on. There are about a dozen attacks on Labour in a not-very-long thread, a

    In your honour I counted 42 comments, 12 critical of Labour of which I think 7 count as attacks. "Bad mistake on Labour's part", for example, is critical but not an attack, while "they reneged on rod and janette" I'm counting as an attack.

    From which I gather you're counting any criticism of Labour as an attack, or you're reading with a bias where attacks shine through in a way that other comments don't.

    Sydney, West Island • Since Nov 2006 • 1233 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca,

    But (I think) the sensible thing for Labour to do in this situation would be to say to the Greens ‘We’ll think about it. Maybe closer to the election. Let’s keep talking.’

    Sounds like they already did say that.

    From Audrey Young in the Herald

    Mr Cunliffe told the Herald tonight he envisaged that Labour would try to negotiate a formal coalition agreement with the Greens after the election,

    "The Labour Party will be the core of the incoming Government working co-operatively with the Green Party who are our longstanding friends.

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown, in reply to Moz,

    From which I gather you’re counting any criticism of Labour as an attack, or you’re reading with a bias where attacks shine through in a way that other comments don’t.

    Nah, I'm not, but "corrupt", "spineless", "lost at sea", "flailing", "owned by the unions" et al did seem unhelpful to me.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22850 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,

    Sounds like they already did say that.

    Also:

    "I'm the leader of the Labour Party and my job is to maximize the Labour Party vote," he said ...

    But Labour would quite possibly be working with other parties as well "and whatever the coalition arrangements are, they need to be able to spread across more than two parties."

    This seems clear and reasonable to me.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22850 posts Report Reply

  • Danyl Mclauchlan,

    Mr Cunliffe told the Herald tonight he envisaged that Labour would try to negotiate a formal coalition agreement with the Greens after the election,

    “The Labour Party will be the core of the incoming Government working co-operatively with the Green Party who are our longstanding friends.

    That’s not the same thing at all. If the press goes to John Key and asks him if he’ll give the Conservative Party a seat this election he won’t say, ‘No. We’ll talk to them after the election. My job is to maximise the National vote.’ He’ll say. ‘We haven’t made any decisions either way yet.’ Maybe it’ll be a smart thing to do six weeks out from the election. But maybe it won’t. He’s keeping his options open because he has no idea what’s going to happen and because he’s smart and likes winning elections.

    Labour doesn’t know what the election campaign will look like either! Six weeks out from the election it might be a good idea to campaign in tandem with the Greens - just as it was for them to team up with the Alliance during the 1999 campaign - at which point it would have been helpful to have had three months of preliminary discussions. Sure, it might also look like a terrible idea, but now they don’t get to choose. And they risk losing soft-Labour voters to the Greens.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 927 posts Report Reply

  • bmk,

    My first thoughts on hearing about it this morning. Is Labour are clearly thinking they can redo 2005; go into coalition with NZF and negotiate abstention from the Greens for a few tokens.

    What their mistake is is that the Greens will make up a much bigger portion of the parliament than they did in 2005. I think the Greens should initiate talks with National at least to prove to Labour they can't be taken for granted. And tbh I think I may well prefer a National-Green govt. than a Labour-NZF one - especially the way Labour have been operating.

    Since Jun 2010 • 327 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia, in reply to Keir Leslie,

    Hard to see that's not the play though, right? It's a clever way to bash Labour as being untrustworthy etc --- the 2005 trope reappears with depressing predictability --- and emphasise the importance of voting Green if you're wavering Green/Labour. Shades of Corngate.

    Oh, who's being a wee bit precious now? If you want to go there, this is quite a clever way for Labour to dog-whistle the Greens as flaky and entitled, so a vote for the Greens is just the splitter's way to guarantee three more years of National. That's the play, right?

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown, in reply to bmk,

    My first thoughts on hearing about it this morning. Is Labour are clearly thinking they can redo 2005; go into coalition with NZF and negotiate abstention from the Greens for a few tokens.

    What their mistake is is that the Greens will make up a much bigger portion of the parliament than they did in 2005.

    I do honestly think they know that. And that their hope is to be negotiating a coalition with the Greens after the election.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22850 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown, in reply to Danyl Mclauchlan,

    Labour doesn’t know what the election campaign will look like either! Six weeks out from the election it might be a good idea to campaign in tandem with the Greens – just as it was for them to team up with the Alliance during the 1999 campaign – at which point it would have been helpful to have had three months of preliminary discussions. Sure, it might also look like a terrible idea, but now they don’t get to choose. And they risk losing soft-Labour voters to the Greens.

    Steady on. No one was asking John Key whether he wanted to campaign jointly with Colin Craig, were they? What Cunliffe said to Audrey Young hardly seems to constrain him as the election approaches.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22850 posts Report Reply

  • Danyl Mclauchlan,

    Steady on. No one was asking John Key whether he wanted to campaign jointly with Colin Craig, were they?

    No, I am aware of that thanks. But National doesn't have a large potential coalition partner who just asked them to campaign with them so I used the Conservatives as an analogy.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 927 posts Report Reply

  • Andrew Geddis, in reply to Danyl Mclauchlan,

    But National doesn’t have a large potential coalition partner who just asked them to campaign with them so I used the Conservatives as an analogy.

    Which makes the analogy a not very good one. Asking John Key "what do you plan to do about Colin Craig" is not the same as asking David Cunliffe "what is your response to the Green's proposal to work together". The idea that Labour could spend the next four months peddling the line "we haven’t made any decisions either way yet" is a bit silly.

    As for suggestions that Labour should do what it did in 1999 and signal clearly that it and the Greens will be cohabitors in Government (as it did with the Alliance back then), there's one big difference. Winston Peters.

    In 1999, a majority Labour-Alliance result was highly achievable (and the best result for both parties). In 2014, does anyone think a Labour-Green majority is possible (even if you add in Mana ... and maybe even the Maori Party)? No - odds are it's going to need Winston to get over the line. And then what odds that he'll be happy to be a spare wheel on a formal Labour-Greens Government?

    Dunedin • Since Nov 2007 • 206 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown, in reply to Andrew Geddis,

    And then what odds that he’ll be happy to be a spare wheel on a formal Labour-Greens Government?

    I went for "wedding guest" in the original post, but yeah.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22850 posts Report Reply

  • Andrew Geddis, in reply to Russell Brown,

    I went for “wedding guest” in the original post, but yeah.

    Given the branding of the political party involved, it would be a red wedding. And I'm not over that yet.

    But call Peters what you want (and there's many things I'd like to) his centrality to any hopes to change the Government is a big difference to 1999 - and a big problem for "the left".

    Dunedin • Since Nov 2007 • 206 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia, in reply to Russell Brown,

    Steady on. No one was asking John Key whether he wanted to campaign jointly with Colin Craig, were they?

    No - instead there were bizarre fantasies that Colin Craig was just going to be handed one of the safest National seats in the country, with the cheerful acquiescence of Murray McCully and the local organization. Which, let me tell you, resulted in some rather ungenerous speculation hereabouts about how many political journalists would pass random workplace drug tests.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • Keir Leslie,

    When Labour made nice with Anderton (note there was no formal agreement), Labour were on track to be the single largest party. Anderton was ex-Labour, and Labour were running continual attacks on the instability and shameless opportunism of a government that was falling to bits and veering between extreme right ideology and weird corruption. The context was very different from this case.

    Since Jul 2008 • 1452 posts Report Reply

  • Chris Waugh,

    Way off topic, but it's about the upcoming election, so as one soon-to-be-repatriate I'd like to recommend this article.

    Wellington • Since Jan 2007 • 2401 posts Report Reply

  • JLM,

    This is heresy, and betrayal from me as a Green, but I'm starting to wonder if the best realistic outcome from this election might be for National to have to cobble up a flaky coalition with Winston. As Winston is an interventionist and does have the glimmerings of a social conscience this would put the brakes on the worst of National's excesses as it did in 1999.

    It would also be wildly unpopular and would give Labour and Greens a space to get their acts together and their messages cutting through to voters as economics and environment worsen.

    Judy Martin's southern sl… • Since Apr 2007 • 241 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel,

    Jeez, Espiner is being a complete oik this morning

    He seems to think we might care more about what he thinks his interviewees think, than letting them tell us themselves …

    He needs to get out of his own way,
    rather than constantly hunting the ‘soundbite’ he wants…

    …or maybe they need to decide who is the good cop and who is the bad cop – him and Suzie Ferguson seem to be both posturing as the ‘bad ass’ interviewer…

    It is very tiresome…

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7953 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia, in reply to JLM,

    This is heresy, and betrayal from me as a Green, but I'm starting to wonder if the best realistic outcome from this election might be for National to have to cobble up a flaky coalition with Winston.

    'Heresy" would be too strong a word, but I'd like everyone (including the media) to think very carefully about what price we'd pay for another go-around with a pathological bigot like Winston. Hey, since we've now got to wait until after the election before asking such impertinent questions (at least where Labour is concerned) I guess we'll never know until it's far too late. But you'll excuse me if I find somewhat unreliable the "social conscience" of a man who has dubious distinction of having opposed every piece of pro-GLBT legislation since Homosexual Law Reform.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • TracyMac,

    I think if Winston gets in there as a nice bandaid to certain voting sectors, such a combination would prove more intractable to get rid of. And when he is being pandered to with a sufficiently-senior ministry, he does know how to keep his mouth shut. At least about the govt.

    And what Craig sez too about Winton's social justice history. I'd rather not have someone with a senior govt role with such obvious biases against queers and immigrants.

    As for Jones, I think the only thing "strategic" about his rantings is that the powers-that-be are very obviously not telling him to STFU. A lazy way to appeal to the Green-haters.

    Canberra, West Island • Since Nov 2006 • 701 posts Report Reply

  • Keir Leslie,

    The Green haters who make up ~1/4* of Labour's vote! Of course Labour wants to keep them in the tent, we don't have the luxury of telling voters they are insufficiently pure --- and if the Greens have any sense, they'd much rather Shane Jones was picking up that vote than Steven Joyce.

    * based on the %age of Labour intendings who prefer a Lab-NZF deal to a Lab-Green deal.

    Since Jul 2008 • 1452 posts Report Reply

  • Johnny Canuck, in reply to Keir Leslie,

    Labour were running continual attacks on the instability and shameless opportunism of a government that was falling to bits and veering between extreme right ideology and weird corruption

    Ah, those were the days. Labour landed hit after hit on that hapless excuse for a government. The contrast with 2014 is ... strong.

    Vancouver BC • Since Feb 2013 • 25 posts Report Reply

  • Kumara Republic,

    In any case, the Greens will be harder for Labour to ignore than in 2002-2005, for the simple fact that they now have double-digit support – the only third party currently in that realm, and even NZ First at its peak never reached that magic number.

    And the Greens' current support is thanks in no small part to a lot of disillusioned Labour voters switching to the them. Disclosure of interest: I was one of them in 2011.

    The southernmost capital … • Since Nov 2006 • 5446 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    Labour may regret this if the Greens decide to not support confidence and supply at all. Good luck running a minority govt with Winnie vs the Nats, and having to seek Greens support bill by bill.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19745 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to JLM,

    the best realistic outcome from this election might be for National to have to cobble up a flaky coalition with Winston

    Looking far too likely. Wouldn't last 3 years, but who needs any more pain?

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19745 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.