Or the reason Garrett appeared at number 5 on Act’s list. We still don’t know what quid pro quo happened there.
I understand he paid for that spot. In six figures apparently.
Dunno Russell, perhaps he really thought it’d be over before he would be pushed to have to drop him.
If that's true, Sofie, it's an astonishing level of magical thinking from a former Police minister.
And I'll compare and contrast with David Parker -- who, IIRC, asked to be stood down from Cabinet and the position of Attorney-General as soon as he was aware that allegations he filed a false declaration with the Companies Office would surface in Insinuate Magazine. While he wasn't fully re-instated when he was cleared by the Companies Office investigation, I've got to say both he and Clark scored some serious brownie points for their good judgement.
Rich Observation made a comment in response to Sacha - Just as a for instance, they talk about stopping money disappearing to Australian banks - but all they have as a solution is giving Kiwibank a bit more scope to expand.
I am sure that during Nats liekly next term the economy will have not recovered (shrunk) to the level that all borrowing will be able to be funded domestically.
WTFF WITH BELLS ON.
Goof is getting shot from all sides and that includes the inside.
I was discussing the fortunes of both parties and the future for NZ with some friends tonight and the point was made that if you look at Labour it has had Carter, Jones and Hughes, and the Nats have had Worth and Wong.
Someone asked what about the working person – and we all fell about laughing – when has that mattered of late.
Can someone remind me who David Parker is. I'm confused.
I'm not at all hard left, just centre left, but stack some of my thoughts up against Goff's and I'm virtually right centre. Gimme someone who can say, yes, we'll nationalise the electricity system because frankly this faux free market is just a joke. Yes, we'll support 12 months parental leave because we know that spending time with your newborn is vital. Yes we'll create programs that target solo mums and their children and the 20% of children that live in poverty because the cost of gaoling them as adults is too expensive.
Sorry, I'm just ranting here... I shall stop.
Yup, stop ranting, and start running for parliament - I'd vote for that.
Spokesperson for Economic Development ringing any bells? :)
Paul, no real disrespect intended; just that what you proferred by way of a counterargument wasn’t one worth the name. While I may be a pretty recent commenter, but I’ve been lurking here long enough to know that’s not generally how things roll. *shrug*
Lew, I have a job.
I would love to have spent the time trawling the 'net to catalogue a list but it's not necessary. Labour's speeches, in and out of Parliament, and a reasonable clutch of policies do represent a body of views that are different from the government. They mightn't be what you wish, but declaring none of them valid is ridiculous. It wasn't a cherrypick, it was the ones I could instantly recall. I could have added the campaign against ECE cuts or the ethical investment stuff or the anti-VSM... but I suspect no list will satisfy you as you are of the view that policies are not sufficient?
And I’ll compare and contrast with David Parker – who, IIRC, asked to be stood down from Cabinet and the position of Attorney-General as soon as he was aware that allegations he filed a false declaration with the Companies Office would surface in Insinuate Magazine
Ok ta craig but can you remind me why you mentioned him earlier. I missed something? Was I away? Was I away with the fairies? Or was I still behind the 8 ball?
'Xcuse me,cheese and mushroom omelette calls.:)
Policies aren't sufficient, unless you wed them to values and a narrative. The percentage of the population that actually reads political speeches and evaluates the policies laid out in them is probably around the 0.001% mark.
In 2008 we knew that John Key was a self-made multi-millionaire and that he would use his economic brilliance to bring about a 'step-change' in the economy, and that his policies were wed to that vision. You didn't need to read any speeches to know that - it was the central element of National's political marketing strategy.
Paul, I understand -- and you don't owe me answers. But all too often what I get by way of counter-argument is 'but what about X Isolated Incident!'. Can't be arsed.
You're right -- a list of policies won't answer the allegation. because while Labour's policy record isn't outstanding, that's not the real problem -- it's that nobody even knows any of their policies. That's the problem, and that's why they're failing.
He is very very good. Very accessible, very out there. Very Three Kings Countdown.
Hey Che, maybe you're the one not completely au fait with MMP - the overhang only occurs if a party gets more electoral seats than it would have by just overall party vote. The MP would need to increase their % of the party vote massively to gain any more seats than they get through directly elected seats.
They got 2.39% of the party vote at the last election - to get to five seats they would need to hold Rahui Katene's seat and either roughly double their party vote or take one of the two of the Labour seats as they're not contesting TTT. I haven't heard anyone outside of yourself suggesting this as a likely possibilty as Katene seems to be in danger of losing her seat and their party vote would do well to equal last election after the Harawera fallout.
I suspect your dream of a single party to help the Nats govern would be NZ First which might scupper the asset selloff.
It's the curse of modern politics that so much time has to be spent wooing a bunch of people who can't decide how they want to vote.
One thing that many forget is that an awful lot of kids turn 18 between elections and kids tend to be idealistic and gullible. The number of ACT on Campus types that have lectured me on the wonders of the free market with absolutely no life experience astounded me. They seem to think that if you vote for money grubbing thugs you will get rich. Go figure. Young Nats are no different and sadly Young Labour supporters, like Labours present leaders, are on the back foot against such self interested people. "We should help others? the others are there to help us or they are Bludgers"
Unfortunately Labour is not as cunning and greedy for power as those that oppose them, their greatest hurdle is their own honesty and compassion. They don't have the animal hunger needed to beat the vicious, nasty resentful crowd that was ambitious for New Zealand.
Six months out from the election is not too shorter time for Labour to put together a populist challeng, unfortunately Goff, in my opinion, is not the animal we need. I think we need "Biffer" Mallard to deliver Mr Wacky Wavy Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man a sound thrashing.
I see bloody Nick Smith out and about being accessible round here - there needs to be more from a leader than just hard work in the constituency, honest toil only goes so far.
I was at my daughter's first soccer game of the year a few years back - the parents were hanging around, we introduced ourselves, one guy said "Hi my name's Dave", someone else said "You look familiar, have we met?", he responded "I would be your Minister of Energy" ... that David Parker .... NZ is a wonderfully small place
Seven. He plucked it all off a tree growing out the back of Garth McVicar's farm.
Oops, you need an edit function. That was in reply to this by Christopher Dempsey;
I understand he paid for that spot. In six figures apparently.
And Cunliffe could do worse than to mount an 'it's the economy, stupid' platform. What it would need though, as with any other platform, is to give people something to think about, instead of pontificating to them.
Also, grassroots movements need to get their arses into gear, as the EPMU seem to have announced.
The key to Goff's stuff-up over Darren Hughes is his deep loyalty and personal friendship to Hughes. Some people find comfort in this - Goff most certainly got it wrong, but for all the most laudable reasons. But to me, Goff's over-weaning loyalty to his sexually louche lieutenant is simply yet another monumental piece of self-indulgent political decadence from one career politician to another.
A left wing political party is, at its heart, an agent of ideological change. This drive for ideological change ultimately coalesces into the form of the party leadership, a person or persons who are meant to symbolise the fears, hopes, values and ideals of those who support their party. The ultimate aim is always an urgent desire for political power, because only power allows you to achieve improvements in the lives of the poorest and most vulnerable. A strong Labour leader should always be impatient in his or her desire to get back into power, for there is much to be done and there should be much hunger to get started. Judged by this standard, Goff's caterwauling about allowing his loyalty to Hughes to cloud his judgement sounds weak and pathetic. An impatient leader would not allow self-indulgent emotion to derail the need to get rid of these Tory bastards at the earliest possible opportunity.
MMP's biggest unintended and regrettable consequence has been the creation of this class of permanent career list-politicians and a whole new phenomena of people who simply see politics as another career option - the mother of the complainant in this affair said her son's ambition was to enter politics and become a politician, for God's sake! On current polling no one in the current Labour caucus will be set to lose their seats. even at an infamous, Bill English like result of 22% the top twenty-eight odd senior politicians in the Labour caucus would still have by dint of the party list their fat salaries, deferential staff and nice perks come November 27th. Why, exactly, should they take a risk now? What is the upside for them? No matter what happens, they've got the job for life under MMP. The consequences of this accumulation of decadent careerist politicians is obvious now in the National party, where the warmed over policy turds of Shipley is all they have offered by way of ideas. The first solution, as far as I can see, is to introduce term limits for MPs, to clean out the careerists and ensure that politicians no longer just think of themselves – as Phil Goff firmly reminded Andrew Little – as a caucus of mutually self-interested professionals, but go back to representing a party and a political movement with a job to do.
…when I said “your dream of a single party to help the Nats govern” I should have put scenario – apologies.
Ok ta craig but can you remind me why you mentioned him earlier.
Because the way he and Clark handled a rather sticky situation couldn't be a more depressing compare and contrast with Goff's determined incompetence.
BTW, I really hope I was having an auditory hallucination this morning when I heard Goff saying Andrew Little was out of the loop (and not shy about expressing his displeasure) because he couldn't contact Little. FFS, folks, the Labour flaxroots really should be firing off "please explain" e-mails if their Parliamentary and organisational leadership are communicating through low-grade sniping on Morning Report.
smiling assassin was his own term for himself I hear
I thought it was what the staff at the organization he was about to cull called him.
Off topic but I have to sob someplace. Just got an email from said mag (now in "his 'n' hers" format... welcome to bizzaro world):
In this coming month, we’re releasing a major new book on New Zealand’s law and order problem, written by crime researcher and former police intelligence analyst David Fraser.
It's called Badlands and subtitled "NZ: A land fit for criminals". "With forewords by Theodore Dalrymple and Garth McVicar".
After throwing up in my mouth, I'm now seriously contemplating sticking a fork in both eyes before I have to read some inane lynchmob blog comment or letter to the editor citing this pile of putresence as "evidence" or "research".
Indeed, I saw a lot of EPMU tee shirts at the fishing tournament yesterday and the grass roots are strong up here. (Northland)
I bumped into John Carter today, he said "Hi, how are you" I said "Still voting Labour" He was accompanied by a Girl* barely 20 years out of school and her arms, legs and upper chest were naked. Scandal I tell you.
*well she was years ago.
I don’t really read Watkins often, but when I do I’m struck by the shallowness of her commentary. She seems to embody the worst of Beltway culture.
And in the Dompost that's about the depth of it.