All posts tagged The Standard

Because it’s funny…

There’s a wide variety of stuff on political blogs. Amongst the serious and the tedious there can be genuinely funny exchanges, like this at The Standard.

Paul:

No the point is that the Nats and others who believe in the neoliberal ideal believe in the self, not society.. Look after yourself as Mrs Thatcher said “there is no such thing as society.” Hence the arrogance and superiority within true Nat believers..you only have to read through an average Standard thread just to see this contemptuous and smug approach.

I don’t think he quite made himself clear there, but anyway, King Kong replied:

In my personal experience I have never witnessed a single example where a tory has been anything other than totally egalitarian. Then again I should expect those kinds of accusations from a plebian underling like you.

And the ever modest Lynn Prentice:

FFS I did a MBA nearly 30 years ago. Do you think that I have forgotten how to beat the market since that training in finance? It simply isn’t hard. It is also something that is quite boring compared to almost every other activity…

It is only a complete fool (or the archetypal National loyalist) that thinks that the required degree in personal selfishness and greed to be blind to other people has much to do with skill sets.

King Kong was on a roll:

Fuck lprent, you’re amazing.

You could take down wall street if you wanted to but you just don’t want to.

Maybe you have to know them but a few obviously saw the funny side.

Update: a classic lprent response:

I realise that subtlety isn’t your strong point (basically you’re a moron in that), but the whole point of my comment was – why would I want to do something as boring as just making money? It is boring as a National or Act party stalwart.

Idiot…

National and Act party stalwarts can certainly be more boring than this.

And Blue on a side thread:

KK you’re on fire today. Blue, BA(Hons), BE(Hons), MBA, EdD. See I’ve got one too.

lprent again:

I did make the point that I got that nearly 30 years ago when it was actually useful. Now I realise you didn’t understand that what I was talking about was a time when every fool (like yourself) didn’t have one. In 1985 there were something like 50 MBA places in NZ. Now there are probably closer to a several thousand.

King Kong:

Incredible. And here I was thinking that I couldn’t adore you any more

The naughty corner might not be long away.

—

Not only is lprent at the top of the heap of blog gurus and programmers, and he could cream the financial markets if he wasn’t so selfless, but he also provides some of the best blog humour – albeit inadvertently, unless he is also an expert self spoofer. The only one in the same class is Redbaiter.

Satirists like Dim Post, Imperator Fish and The Civilian have to try hard to keep the quantity and quality up, and all can have their off days and writer’s block (The Civilian may not be there yet), but lprent and Redbaiter can do it without batting an eyelid, consistently, flawlessly and, like, forever.

Leave a Comment
by Pete George on May 3, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in General
Tagged , ,

Posted by Pete George on May 3, 2013

http://yournz.org/2013/05/03/because-its-funny/

Farmers unhappy about lower power prices?

Mike Smith at The Standard asks: Farmers unhappy about lower power prices? and comments:

Former banker Bruce Wills and current head of Federated Farmers has joined the chorus attacking NZPower. He invokes how horrible  life was before 1984, as thought this had something to do with NZPower. You can read the full list of his horrors here.

He wonders:

It would be interesting to know if real farmers would rather have lower power prices, or banker Bruce as their spokesman.

I’m not so sure that this latest addition to the NZPower naysayers chorus has much in the way of real arguments. His reaction seems more based on specious history and knee-jerk ideology.

There was a quick reply from a farmer, ‘Jimmie’:

I’m a farmer and let me think:

If the Lab/Greens get in well lets see what the net benefit of their combined policies would be in relation to power bills:

- NZ Power = -$300 p/a (maybe)

ETS increase = + how much??
Petrol tax increase = + how much??
Income tax increase = + how much??
Interest rate increase = + how much??
RMA red tape cost increase = + how much??
Capital Value lost through CGT = + how much??
Land Use restrictions = + how much??

Hmmmm I wonder which option I would rather go with the status quo or the watermelon nightmare?

‘Karol’ responds:

Oh, so increases for the better off people, but ignoring that a lot of your list will have little impact on those who are, right now, struggling to pay their power bills. The latter people will be better off with lower power prices.

Such things as NZ power, and any other changes to taxes, will be a correction after the tax cuts for the wealthy in recent years, which have been at the expense of the less well off.

And Jimmie again:

Well then maybe the Lab/Greens should have been honest then.

Instead of bleating on at a press conference about reducing everyone’s power bill by an average of $300 they should have said rich pricks are gona pay more and poor folks will pay less.

(Though why you think that poor folks don’t buy petrol or that the ETS increase will somehow be aimed only at rich pricks beats me)

NZ Power was a ill-thought out and dishonest attempt to interfere with the MRP float – it may have given a vague short term boost to the far left morale but how will it be read by the general public – many of whom are in the process of buying the MRP shares.

NZ Power might end up being Shearer’s ‘show us the money’ moment and also the moment when the MSM decide that the Green’s economic policies require a fair bit more scrutiny.

There has been a few fairly muted follow-up comments.

The Standard seems to be getting a second wind on promoting NZ Power (or more accurately, fighting back against opposition to it), ‘Eddie’ has also posted – Why Doug Heffernan wants you to keep paying too much for power:

NZ Power is a direct threat to the health of Heffernan’s bank accounts. It will cut Mighty River’s profits by about two-thirds – with a similar effect on the share price. It will mean that its directors will have to cut their clothe, and their over-blown executive pay packets.

So, no wonder Heffernan, the most highly paid public ‘servant’ of all time, took the extraordinary and unconstitutional step of commenting on political parties’ policies. He called NZ Power ‘socialist‘ (as if that’s a bad thing) because it means lower power bills for you and me, which means less pay and lower share values for him.

Remember, when Doug Heffernan pops up to say that he doesn’t think it’s a good idea for you to pay less for power that he has made millions off the current broken system and stands to make millions more if we stick with National’s broken system. Doug Heffernan’s bank accounts will be a lot more healthier if you keep on paying too much.

That continues the rich prick envy versus poor people paying too much for power lines favoured by the left of Labour.

This has become a battle between narrow ideology and wider economics.

Mike Smith works in David Shearer’s office.
‘Eddie’ is a Labour Party activist pseudonym.

Leave a Comment
by Pete George on April 29, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in General
Tagged , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on April 29, 2013

http://yournz.org/2013/04/29/farmers-unhappy-about-lower-power-prices/

Power promotion at The Standard

Labour’s regular and occasional bloggers came out in force to promote the NZ Power policy when it was launched last week.

Thursday 18 April

Friday 19 April

Saturday 20 April

Sunday 21 April

Monday 22 April

Tuesday 23 April

Wednesday 24 April

Thursday 25 April

Friday 26 April

Anthony Robins (Labour), karol and ‘James Henderson’ (Greens) are regulars, the others usually only pop up when there is Labour politics to push.

Many political stories hit the blogosphere with a hiss and a roar and fade just as fast, but NZ Power was described by David Shearer as “the big Kahuna”. As at Your NZ other blogs are still actively commenting on NZ Power related stories, such as The Daily Blog, Kiwiblog and Whale Oil.

Maybe The Standard will pick up on the Power debate again but it seems to have fixxled out on it’s enthusiasm.

NZ Power and the next step

Written By: – Date published:

2 Comments
by Pete George on April 26, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in General
Tagged ,

Posted by Pete George on April 26, 2013

http://yournz.org/2013/04/26/power-promotion-at-the-standard/

What The Standard isn’t saying

It’s been interesting to follow the responses to the NZ Power announcement and compare them to now.

When Labour launched there was a flurry of posts from authors that usually only appear when pushing something for someone in the party. Mike Smith posts rarely yet had three promoters – he works in Shearer’s office.

‘Eddie’ and ‘Zetetic’ also got involved, Anthony Robins was very busy for Labour (and so was ‘James Henderson’ who some claim to be a now well known Green staffer).

For a couple of days most posts and comments were about NZ Power.

Since midday on Wednesday there have been no more posts on power. There has been a little comment on Chris Trotter’s post at The Daily Blog criticisng Robertson – “Hey, Julian! – We Are NOT Pleased!” Grant Robertson Calls Off Labour’s Assault On Neoliberalism

But the excitement over a new direction for Labour (a leftward turn) has fizzled and they are back to their usual mix of mundane moaning.

The day NZ power was launched IrishBill posted NZ Power and ther next step where he said:

The NZ Power policy is the most significant break from the neoliberal political consensus we’ve seen for a long time.

Which is why it’s likely to draw a lot of fire from the elite. Let make sure there’s a lot of push back.

The Power seeems to have ben pushed back to off.

What blogs don’t comment on can be as interesting as what they say.

2 Comments
by Pete George on April 26, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in General
Tagged , ,

Posted by Pete George on April 26, 2013

http://yournz.org/2013/04/26/what-the-standard-isnt-saying/

View from the left – Labour Green election prospects

A thoughtful view on Labour and Green election prospects from Te Reo Putake at The Standard. I have a bit of a history of clashes with TRP but this is out of (his usual) character, I think these comments are a useful and realistic look at what the near future may hold for the political left.

If Labour Needs to Move Left, Why are the Greens Stuck in the Teens?

A couple of themes that occasionally pop up in The Standard’s comments are the need for the Labour Party to adopt more left wing policies to ‘win’ the next election and, less often, and far less likely, predictions that the NZLP will soon be the junior partner on the left.

I’m in favour of Labour adopting left wing policies and I will be doing my best to make sure we have credible, well thought out left platforms adopted at the next national conference, in Christchurch, this November. Those policies will be binding on caucus and the party will expect the campaign to be fought on the ideas, issues and solutions the membership want taken to the electorate. I suspect some policies will be dead rats for Shearer and the coterie around him, but tough. That’s democracy.

But if the Labour Party presents policies that are as left wing as some of those espoused by the Greens, will that make the difference? Will that lift the NZLP vote into the high thirties/low forties, where it should really be under MMP?

I suspect not.

Whether Standardistas like it or not, a leftist, or even leftish, platform, by itself, does not guarantee support, let alone victory, in Western Parliamentary elections. If it did, then the Greens would already be outpolling Labour. But they are not; and, I confidently predict, they never will.

There are two reasons for it. Firstly, the Green’s branding limits them to single figures, or just above. The party name suggests that environmental policies are the limit of their ambition. Not true, of course, but that is how they are perceived and the results reflect that fact.

It is to the considerable credit of kiwi greens MP’s and activists that the GP has been more successful than any other Green Party worldwide, but that’s as far as its likely to go.

Secondly, the NZ Labour Party has history on its side. It has been, and remains, the only credible alternative leader of Government in NZ. It’s been National or Labour for 75 years and for a lot of voters, it’s barely different from choosing Ford or Holden when Bathurst rolls around each year.

National and Labour are the Big Beasts of NZ politics and MMP has not changed that.

So, what’s the other factor in getting a left Government in place? Well, it’s leadership, obviously enough. And David Shearer’s minor oversight in forgetting he had $50k or more socked away in a yank bank tells me that he doesn’t have what it takes for the kind of victory the NZ people deserve.

I’m not saying that he won’t be PM after the next election, but the majority will be painfully thin, when we should be heading for a repeat of 1999. But, then, in ‘99, we had a clear alternative Government to vote for: Labour/Alliance. Few signs yet that NZLP and the Greens will be able to present a similarly credible bloc to vote for this time round.

My prediction? NZLP 35%, Greens 12%. I’m not even sure that the Greens will be part of the next Government. It could well be a minority LP/NZF with GP support on confidence and supply, because the continuous slippage in National’s vote since the last election will help shore up Winston and I believe Shearer will opt for the least challenging coalition partner, being the pragmatist that he appears to be.

One final point on Winston; he doesn’t seem to be as belligerent toward the Greens as he was six years ago. Perhaps he’s ready to swallow a dead rat of his own?

The dead rat link and other links don’t work. If they are fixed at The Standard I’ll fix them here.

by Pete George on April 5, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in General
Tagged , , , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on April 5, 2013

http://yournz.org/2013/04/05/view-from-the-left-labour-and-green-election-prospects/

Zetetic – a silly goose

A Standard post by Zetetic, Good for the goose:

As you know, the Right says more money incentivises harder work. John Key felt he wasn’t working very hard when he first became PM on a net $250,000 a year, so he gave himself tax cuts and pay rises worth $100 a day. Just look at the results!

But I’m confused: why’s he cutting our pay with youth wages, higher Kiwisaver, and higher student loan repayments? Is it that rich people work harder when they get more money and poor people work harder when they get less?

Silly goose. Zetetic is very confused. “Our pay” is not being cut.

  • More youth now have a entry level employment opportunity they wouldn’t otherwise have had
  • Higher Kiwisaver rates don’t cut wages, it moves wages to savings, unless the employee chooses not to
  • Higher student loan deductions don’t cut wages, they pay off debt faster from the same wages

With that degree of confused thinking I hope Zetetic doesn’t work in any field that requires an understanding of employment, wages and deductions.

Zetetic concludes:

I guess the elite really do see us as a different species – mules, I suppose. And I see them as a different species but for different reasons and as a different species – leeches.

That’s typical old school union “us” versus those who provide them with jobs and livelihoods rhetoric.

I wonder if Zetetic was in a position to keep giving himself pay rises through the last few years when many workers and business owners had to do with less to survive the difficult economic times.

 

by Pete George on April 2, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in General
Tagged ,

Posted by Pete George on April 2, 2013

http://yournz.org/2013/04/02/zetetic-a-silly-goose/

Extending my blogging

One of the great things about blogging is if you do enough of it eventually new opportunities will come up to be have even more exposure.

Imperator Fish has announced today:

You will see a few changes to this site over the next few weeks, but hopefully nothing too major. Mostly just a change in design to be consistent with the party’s colours and logo, and the introduction of a new author, a fellow United Future traveller. I’m sure Pete George needs no introduction to most of you, and I’m delighted he has agreed to contribute.

And it’s good to see that Scott has looked at a party site that actually has a comprehensive list of policies, the Labour Party website is as lacking in policy detail as David Shearer’s brain.

And if you thought I might be overextending myself don’t worry, there are other ways of being seen in the blogosphere. Using a ghost writer makes this easy, all I had to do was wait until my stand-in was familiar enough with how I think and how I write.

This has been announced today at The Standard:

I have decided to end my self imposed exile from commenting here,
I’ve put a lot of time into thinking about it – at times and have made the decision to become a full time blog commentator. I can fit in a lot more now as I usually get up early, it’s when I enjoy doing most online, and then dabble during the day when I feel like it. But in the main I am needed to bring balance and fairness throughout the blog-sphere.

I can no longer stand by and watch the Standard become an echo chamber, Standard moderators keep shutting out diversity by banning anyone who blinks out of step with the comrades and the blog risks becoming further unbalanced. I for one gave some very fair comments that added a lot of balance, without which The Standard has become hopelessly left leaning and I for one can’t stand by and let that happen. As I like to say if you don’t let shit happen shit happens.

There are slight teething problems, my quote was actually:

“If you don’t let shit happen you’re a bit stuffed.”

But that’s pretty good for starters.

It won’t be long before I’m competing with Martyn Bradbury…

The stats are in and we have exceeded my wildest ambition. The Daily Blog in its debut month achieved 196886 page views! The appetite online to hear the other side of the story is larger than I had hoped.

But I’m achieving more than Bomber, he is using other people to fill up his posts, I’m replicating myself so I’m sure I’ll be exceeding my own wildest ambitions before long.

Just what everyone wanted, more of Pete George around the blogosphere.

by Pete George on April 1, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in General
Tagged , ,

Posted by Pete George on April 1, 2013

http://yournz.org/2013/04/01/extending-my-blogging/

Auckland based Labour activist – “Labour is best to lose”

A comment on Labour problems by AucklandBasedLabourActivist on the Labour’s Three factions thread at The Standard:

Thank you TS for this. The last time I read this site was in 2009. A few caucus members and committed MP followers (ie Young Labour ‘hacks’) on my Facebook feed constantly degrade the contributions of this blog, and tell us (active party folk) that it’s not worth reading. Well, after seeing a comment from an MP on Facebook tonight…I decided to have a look.

After reading this it sums up so much about why, as a long time (and previously senior) party official, I feel so disillusioned with Labour’s internal politics.

This sums up why Labour is best to lose the next election, than win it. And it’s incredibly hard to say that, but the reality stands that under David Shearer’s leadership are individuals who are effectively holding the party to ransom due to their own vendettas against individuals and their own personal ambitions. It’s insidious and it must stop now.

I am seeing countless people leave in my Auckland community shifting to the Greens or disengaging completely because of the toxic attitude and behavior of MPs like Darien Fenton, Clare Curran, but very much led by Grant Robertson (people don’t realise it at face value), Annette King, Trevor Mallard, Phil Goff and co.

Their behavior at the 2012 conference sums up their own ambitions. For their own hatred of David Cunliffe and fighting for their own personal political careers, they are prepared to tear apart the Labour Party, disrespect party members, manipulate long time activists and union affiliate members for their own political game.

For the likes of Darien Fenton. The fact she’s come onto this forum shows her poor political judgement, but most particularly it shows she’s worried. She is very quickly losing credibility amongst her own core Labour support (from what I’m told, largely because of her antics at the Labour Party conference where she tried to manipulate union affiliates members and significantly disrespected affiliate leadership).

Darien knows that this blog post exposes the realities of Labour’s internal situation.

There are activists on social media saying this is satirical, saying this post is wacky and completely loony. Well, again, as a disillusioned former senior party official, it’s hard to write this so publicly, but this blog tells it for what it is. For activists to simply ignore this and say it’s far from reality, shows they are so stuck in their own (mostly Wellington) political bubble and interested in their own agendas than the Party as a whole.

The bottom line however is that Labour need to change considerably in order for us to win the next election. The careerists need a slap in the face and Grant Robertson needs to stop holding the party back while he lines up the numbers in his favour.

by Pete George on March 26, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in General
Tagged , , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on March 26, 2013

http://yournz.org/2013/03/26/auckland-based-labour-activist-labour-is-best-to-lose/

Faction fight – on Little (and Cunliffe and Shearer)

Amongst the reignited faction fight at The Standard are some interesting bits of insight – @lee commented on Andrew Little, plus comments on David Cunliffe and David Cunliffe:

I wonder whether Little will turn out to be the prime beneficiary of all this, rather than Robertson: Little appears to have come out of it all as the grey man, with nobody sure what he thinks and being relatively unscathed.

I read the division as a simple reflection of the fact that the majority of caucus think Cunliffe is a wanker with an uncontrollable ego, who would be hell to work with as leader – i.e. they don’t think he has leadership skills; think Kevin Rudd without the Mandarin.

The thing that the parliamentary Cunliffe supporters almost all have in common is this: a perception they are shirkers and/or incompetents. A couple of them, Cunliffe included, just have poor personal relationships inside caucus and know that Cunliife being leader is the only shot they have of ever being in Cabinet.

I am continually amazed that people think Cunliffe is Left and that nobody touting him as the solution has ever seemed to pause publicly to ask how he went from one of the most economically rightwing members of the last government to the doyenne of the activist left of the Party?

This is a protege of Helen Third Way Clark we’re talking about, an admirer of Tony Blair and Bill Clinton: with all that comes with it, including (and especially) triangulation. This is a man who lives outside his electorate in Herne Bay(!) instead stooping to living in, say, Titirangi or Piha.

The positives around Shearer are that he is a very likable and good man, and a gifted leader (albeit not a natural politician) who does not shy away from and deals with internal conflict in robust manner, and who thrives under pressure. Shearer’s ego is well under control – it’s not like he thinks he’s an awesome public speaker, for instance.

It’s not about left or right, it’s about personalities: the party would be healthier if it were about the former. I think if the Cunliffe crowd were removed, then the cleavages would be far more ideological and better for the Party and NZ.

The Fan Club replied:

I have heard versions of that ranging from Little was playing two positions through to he just didn’t push the affiliates very hard. I don’t buy the claim he was pushing the unions towards 40%, but I do think he probably didn’t waste much capital on that.

He was still publicly pro-Shearer, no matter what was going on behind the scenes.

And Colonial Viper added:

Now that you’ve detailed Cunliffe’s adherence to 3rd way politics, his supposed history on the “Right Wing” (lol) and his being an admirer of the likes of Clinton and Blair…

Please explain to us – what is Shearer’s stance on political economics? Which political leaders does he admire and why?

In his Labour’s three factions post Eddie placed Little in the Cunliffe faction, but also commented:

Andrew Little is a bit of wild card here, while his politics are firmly left you can’t count him on him voting for any one particular faction.

Anne:

Andrew little has mana and respect across the board.

But from The Fan Club:

Little’s pretty well known to be doing the work for Shearer.

He wasn’t richly rewarded in the recent reshuffle, being placed at 19 in Shearer’s pecking order (compared to fellow rookie David Clark at 12).

Jim Davis:

If you think Little is ‘doing Shearer’s work’ then you’re woefully misinformed. By all accounts he’s playing with a very straight bat and trying to avoid getting embroiled in factionalism. I’m not convinced it’s a winning strategy, but it’s the one he seems to have chosen.

The Fan Club:

Yeah, Little plays it straight to a large extent, because apart from anything else he’s got his own future to consider. But he was definitely working against Cunliffe at conference.

Daveo:

Little’s politics are strongly left. He’s very much his own man though and doesn’t easily fit into any of the factions. What is known is that he’s supported Cunliffe from time to time, including in the initial leadership race against Shearer. Have to agree with the post though, all you could say is he’s a wild card with Left tendencies.

Most of those comments are from what appear to be Labour Party insiders who are non-regular commenters at The Standard.

The consensus seems to be that Andrew Little is not strongly associated with any faction, and that he is playing a long game. He knows he is too new to parliament to be a contender for leader this term. It appears that he may be working hard to set himself up for putting himself forward when the time is right.

The inexperienced Shearer risk has created more problems than it has solved for Labour. If Labour fail to be able to form the next Government it is widely thought that Grant Robertson will step up, and it will still be too soon for Little in early 2015.

Little will be trying to line himself up for the next opportunity after that. In ther meantime it looks like he is trying to avoid getting offside with any of Labour’s factions.

by Pete George on March 26, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in General
Tagged , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on March 26, 2013

http://yournz.org/2013/03/26/faction-fight-on-little-and-cunliffe-and-shearer/

The Standard – Labour faction fight

Yesterday ‘Eddie’ stirred up the Labour leadership and factional issues again by posting Labour’s three factions at The Standard.

It’s easy to be suspicious of Eddie’s motives, but regardless of what they might be posts like this at The Standard attract non-regular commenters and ignite comment that can be quite revealing.

The Labour caucus response is especially interesting. At the time of the Cunliffe conference “coup” attempt “The Fan Club” appeared at The Standard, to wave a caucus stick, then disappeared when that fizzled out.

The Fan Club has shown up on this thread too, to take the fight back to the Standardistas. While The Fan Club often presents as an arrogant arsehole they are also revealing, sometimes inadvertently (ego driven). But this is a good summary of what Eddie’s post may be about:

This is basically the faction fight: a rather unholy alliance of Auckland based Clark-era apparatchiks who never quite made it and far-left unionists who’ve filtered back in as the Alliance has died off against the rest of the party. Fortunately, the rest of the party is winning.

It was Cunliffe that started the fight at conference and when he inevitably lost he can only blame himself.

That describes a prominent Standard core well, a core that was very active in promoting Cunliffe’s chances before last November’s conference. One from that core, lprent (Lynn Prentice), posted a pertinent response to The Fan Club:

Looks to me like a pyrrhic “victory”. The type where the battle is won which merely ensures that the war is lost.

That could well be correct. Labour’s current leadership factions may have won the recent internal battles but they are losing long time activist support, and they are failing to inspire the wider electorate – in fact they are failing to even look adequately competent.

And while congratulating themselves on their internal victories they remain blind to the damage being done to Labour on the outside.

An exchange between Standard regulars Pascal’s Bookie and mickysavage, and head office heavy The Fan Club, says much:

PB: The fact that connected LP people seem to think that this post is the problem to be publicly attacked, rather than seeing it as a symptom of a problem to be identified and fixed, is yet another symptom of the problem.

TFC: I like this post. It sets out pretty clearly the people who’re doing a good job and the people who’re off in the middle of nowhere fucking around. Of course, Eddie & MS & so-on are fucking around in the fantasyland where one day they’ll win the faction fight they keep begging to have, but the fact that they are posting this kind of crap on the internet is a pretty good indicator they never will. If you have the numbers you use them, if you don’t you talk about them.

MS: Fan Club … nice to see you are back. I haven’t seen you for a while, the last time was to launch another anti Cunliffe diatribe.

TFC: Yeah, I feel that given you guys can’t seem to accept that you lost someone has to occasionally drop by and remind you of the crushing defeats you get whenever you manage to push things to a crisis.

PB: Thanks for proving my point so precisely FC.

TFC: What, you mean the point that people who want a faction fight get one? Yeah, that point’s a good one.

PB: Nope. The point that “connected LP people seem to think that this post is the problem to be publicly attacked, rather than seeing it as a symptom of a problem to be identified and fixed”.

There wouldn’t be posts like this if there wasn’t a problem.
The fact this post exists, and has so many comments, shows how shit the leadership team is.

And here you are, doing what?

Nothing good for the LP as far as I can see.

Once again there is no sign that Labour’s leadership understands the depth of dissatisfaction and dysfunction within the party.

If they want to learn a lesson about where their blindness and arsehole-like arrogance might get them they could look across the Tasman at Labor’s panic and mayhem leading towards an election. But they have shown no sign of understanding bigger picture realities.

All that’s been missing from the Labour’s three factions thread is Te Reo Putake trying to convince the Standardistas that a Labour (+Green+NZFirst) victory is a virtually assured next year, all the troops should do is shut up and dutifully support their leader and their party.

A suspiciously similar new name, TeRuhePotae, tried similar:

Can you guys stop ruining my Labour Party with petty name calling, list making, and posturing. How about you all focus on attacking the Tories and bringing a much needed change of Government to this country.

A response to that from lprent:

At present the most effective way to do that appears to be to vote Green until Labour sorts its crap out in caucus. At least the Green policies appear to be coherent, not as badly poll/focus group driven, and their caucus seems to largely work together. Well at least they do when you compare their performance against the dysfunctional and incompetent state of Labour MP’s both individually and even more so in caucus.

Basically, I’m havng a really hard time seeing the current Labour caucus being able to run an effective government without some other party providing some ideas to give them a backbone. Sure Labour would be better than the Nats. But that really isn’t that hard. And I really don’t think that choosing between incompetent blowhard conservatives and less incompetent but incoherent and vague that is the current Labour caucus is the kind of aspiration I have for my vote.

And incidentally, it is my Labour party as well and has been since 1981 when I first voted for them, and since 1984 when I first door knocked for them, or 1992 when I first started to actively campaign for them. So it will be a bit of a change next year will be the first time I revert back to the Values party I last voted for in 1978.

Problem is that I see fuckall party at present in the Labour party and far too many MPs who’d I have a real problem saying what they stand for. I don’t even haven’t agree with their ideas – I never really did with Helen Clark’s caucus. I’d just like them to show that they have some frigging ideas that aren’t half-arsed and that they have thought through. In other words,that aren’t like their quarter acre dream houses for $300k in Auckland nonsense.

Labour’s head office may think their internal party criticism is just “a rather unholy alliance of Auckland based Clark-era apparatchiks who never quite made it and far-left unionists who’ve filtered back in as the Alliance” – but their problems run much wider than that.

I know a number of people outside political insider circles who would normally have been sympathetic to Labour, and sometimes have voted for Labour.

A very common response to Shearer on TV or another half arsed petty attack from a Labour MP is a rolling of eyes and turning off – turning off Labour and turning off politics.

I started looking at how to take an active part in politics in 2009, after the Clark Government had lost. I approached some Labour MPs, offering some input from the outside of the party. I naively thought I could contribute to them rebuilding their party.

But they didn’t want new views and opinions. They wanted quiet servants who would support and praise an out of touch party that resisted looking forward. I decided I didn’t want to be a part of that, and Labour went on to keep repeating past mistakes under Goff, which failed. They then chose a leader who has proven to be no more a fresh old face on the same old party.

By the look of The Standard yesterday Labour’s leadership still has go no idea how to win a war, they are too obsessed with battles that are bonkers.

The Standard may have re-sparked factional fighting within Labour in the blogosphere bubble, but this is just one symptom of much wider and more deepseated problems in New Zealand’s political landscape that Labour’s leadership seem determined to keep ignoring.

by Pete George on March 26, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in General
Tagged , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on March 26, 2013

http://yournz.org/2013/03/26/the-standard-labour-faction-fight/

« Older Posts
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 78 other followers