I'm sorry, that's just wrong.
UK Labour started a 1/3:1/3:1/3 caucus:members:affiliates voting at the start of the 80s.
Tony Blair and a number before him were elected under that system.
Until Milliband (Ed) beat Milliband (David) in 2010 all 3 parts of the electoral college voted the same way.
There Ed beat David in much the same way as Andrew beat Grant (but the margins on all 3 parts were smaller). And Ed is getting the "there because of the unions" gumph.
Of course, if a leader does well, no-one will care how he was elected.
It may not be one member, one vote – rather union solidarity – But it’s not some unelected executive providing a bloc of votes either.
Sure. I know the theory. But I've been in a union long enough to know the reality, too.
I am just wondering what or who all those folk merrily abandoning Labour might be offering, as alternatives to their apparent assent to years more of National and their reactionary politics,
I am just wondering what or who all those folk merrily abandoning Labour might be offerings as alternatives to their apparent assent to years more of National and reactionary politics,
There's no lack of precedents. Michael Bassett, for example, got himself a speechwriting gig for Don Brash :)
BTW Little is handling the Sutton thing damn well so far.
What people need to do is actually give the guy a chance.
No one is going to "give the guy a chance". This is about who will be prime minister of New Zealand, not a giving a troubled teen a go at a job making fries at McDonalds.
No one gave Muldoon or Lange or Bolger or Clark or Key "a chance". To the contrary, powerful institutions (including the Labour or National party depending) did everything they could not to give them a chance.
If Andrew Little wants his name to be the next in that line, then he has to achieve it despite the fact powerful institutions will be doing everything they can to stop him.
And none of this is sinister. This is how competitive democracy works and it serves us better than any alternative I am aware of.
powerful institutions will be doing everything they can to stop him.
The tipline is running hot then?
The least we can offer is the 90 day provision ?
Less than 24 hours after the result of our leadership election has been announced? I think it’s okay to keep on talking it over for a few days. If people are still talking about it say, when the New Year rolls around, then I’d be deeply worried. I’m hoping that the internal focus will shift by 2015, and preferably sooner.
Point well made. I guess I was just slightly disappointed that the moment, and I do mean moment, the announcement was made I was reading criticism of the process like it was somehow new or a surprise which it most certainly wasn't.
No one gave Muldoon or Lange or Bolger or Clark or Key “a chance”.
Key wasn't given a chance, he was given a back rub and smothered in kisses.
Some of us remember 2006-8, even if you choose not to. The most sycophantic coverage of an opposition leader I have seen in 30 years. Exhibit A: NZ Herald. Exhibit B: Paul Henry and TVNZ. Exhibit C: pretty much everyone, actually.
I am just wondering what or who all those folk merrily abandoning Labour might be offering as alternatives
One can only hope that this version of Labour is willing to accept that MMP is a thing and contemplate governing with the assistance of other parties. Which means that there are many choices for people who kinda like some things Labour (used to?) stand for but don't necessarily want to vote for whatever it is that Little-Labour might turn out to want.
So for me, there's The Greens, Mana, possibly even a Green-Libertarian party if one of those arose. Sheesh, if The Greens appointed Steffan Green as leader I might even vote for the Internet Party.
And if Labour choose the "anything but government" option again... that's not my preference, and my vote will have expressed that in the only way it can.
He’s clearly got a brain on him, and a lot of experience, and seems like a very good fast talker. I feel pretty stoked really. If he goes through with 70% of what he’s talking about there, I might even switch back to voting Labour, and if you’d asked me that yesterday I’d have said that was impossible.
Andrew is an impressive individual who will, as Mathew said, still have to grab this chance but he has to have the party's support and as Sacha said, Grant Robertson has been nothing short of emphatic in his position and support for Andrew. This is typical of Grant too. He's a entirely principled individual who realises the narrative has to change regardless of him not being leader.
One can only hope that this version of Labour is willing to accept that MMP is a thing and contemplate governing with the assistance of other parties.
You mean just as Labour did when Helen Clark was the leader of a minority government, with confidence and supply arrangements with New Zealand First and United Future?
And Tolley is looking at superannuation. Will be interesting if she wants to raise the age. Let her get kudos for that I say . MSD needs to save a bundle
Just hope she doesn’t do a buster Bennet on beneficiaries.
Tolley isn't looking at super, MSD suggested it in their Briefing to the Incoming Minister, which the Minister can choose to ignore, which they will because John Key has pledged his career on it
"… there are many choices for people who kinda like some things Labour (used to?) stand for but don’t necessarily want to vote for whatever it is that Little-Labour might turn out to want."
?? So people are leaving Labour because of 'what they might turn out to want'? Wouldn't it make more sense to hang around and _find out_ what they want before making the decision to leave?
Key wasn’t given a chance, he was given a back rub and smothered in kisses.
Thank you, my thoughts exactly. Hooton ,all shootin’ again and he’d be the biggest kiss arse for Key if ever I saw one and all for what? Is it because the guy is a good gambler? Is it because Key is good at gambling with other peoples money? Well he is gambling our Countries and some people think that’s perfectly acceptable without everyone’ s permission. And “a Mandate” can go jump.
ETA and , while I’m at it. A bunch of liars, cheats, and thieves and the likes of Hooton find that acceptable. Frankly it stinks and now it’s all over MSM’s face. Heaps of them should feel ashamed that their work has been so shoddy for at least 6 years now. At least with the slug ,we see him out in the open once the extent was uncovered. MSM in general have run for cover and pretend there is “nothing to see here. David Fisher is an exception which I admire.
If Grant won, here's what would happen The media would have made a huge issue of his orientation and the idea of a gay prime minister. It would of locked in the idea to the Joe Public centrist that Labour is run by sexual politics, an ugly rumour that is vogue for the right wing.
There is still so much weirdness out there to gay citizens and no, it's not good or healthy but this is the problem of G.R. It's not good but I don't think our press are mature enough to handle him fairly. It sucks.
Hooten is right...Little doesn't need us all to "give him a break", he just has to harden up...which is exactly what he's doing and has done in a very successful campaign that goes right back to the union-backed election of Cunliffe. If you doubt his ability to organise and get what he wants, look at what's just happened.
I figure most of the "Labour" people complaining about what's happened voted for the Greens anyway...
Dear Mr Little.
The issue of sharing the gdp fairly amongst the citizens is Labours core message now to election day .Most of us, who haul our tired bodies out of bed each morning to work for the strength of the economy are sick of receiving less and less each year while wealth soars for the wealthy.
Pay your fair share to make this country strong.
I agree Jack.
Okay, let's say Little is indeed the person for the job and he'll take the bull by the horns etc. They're still going to have to either find him a new electorate or perform a particularly radical turnaround in New Plymouth. As Phil Quin wrote before the vote:
In the two elections since Little became Labour’s candidate in New Plymouth, National's party vote margin in the electorate has more than doubled from 6,600 to 13,000 votes. After a 5.8 percent two-party swing from Labour to National in 2011, there was a further 6.3 percent swing in New Plymouth this year – roughly three times worse than the nationwide average.
As the electorate candidate, Little also attracted 6,500 fewer electorate votes than in 2008 when the previous Labour member, Harry Duynhoven, lost the seat. After three years of resources and profile as a list MP based partly in New Plymouth, Little managed a 7.8 percent swing against him on the electorate vote this year, to compound the 6.7 percent he suffered in 2011.
It's not credible to stand a leader who does that badly in his own electorate, especially one who also failed to win a majority of caucus and party membership votes in becoming leader. I presume they start looking for a very safe Labour seat for him now.
The finance portfolio is another problem. Parker doesn't want to do the job under Little -- but can Little really choose Cunliffe, after his post-election meltdown?
And Little saying once on the radio that he likes UBI is a long way from going into an election with it. It's a grand idea practised by no country in the world. Of course, there has to be a first one, but it would be a bit odd ditching an orthodox policy like CGT because it was too strange and challenging for voters but then adopting UBI.
Pay your fair share to make this country strong.
From each accordant to their ability , to each according to their need. (Communist manifesto)
Fairness for all. Wouldn't it be nice..da da da da da (Beach Boys)
It’s not credible to stand a leader who does that badly in his own electorate, especially one who also failed to win a majority of caucus and party membership votes in becoming leader. I presume they start looking for a very safe Labour seat for him now.
He'll be parachuted into Island Bay or Mt Roskill or one of the other ones currently held by someone that ought to have retired as an MP by now and is preventing young blood entering the party.
All I'm saying is that I think he has a long-term plan and that I believe that he is competent. Everyone else in the competition seemed to be relying on their own imagined cult of personality and some sort of marketing miracle.
New Plymouth...sorry New Plymouth...doesn't REALLY matter does it? His campaign has been focused on this role from the outset. Justifying New Plymouth is the least of his problems...
Yeah...he may be an abject failure...I'm happy to be proved wrong. But...like I said, I've seen him operate and rate him.
What’s wrong with a Union?
Nothing at all. But their inordinate effect on the leadership vote is. As I said earlier, the vote should've just been made by the caucus.