Little Labour left?

Rob Hosking at NBR asks What’s Left for Little’s Labour?

LittlelabourLeft

The path of the most recent ten years in what is now a 100-year history of the party is less illustrious.

An increasingly narrow, inward-looking defensive and incoherent Labour party is struggling for relevance in the 21st century.

The question in this parliamentary term passing it’s halfway point is whether Labour under leader Andrew Little is even remotely looking like an alternative government.

Perhaps a harsh view from the right but not unlike what you might read on a labour left blog like The Standard or further left at The Daily Blog.

 

Leave a comment

13 Comments

  1. Pantsdownbrown

     /  29th April 2016

    Labour have gone backwards because they have retreated to their core support and abandoned the fight for the centre ground in this country which is where every election is won. This is due mainly to various far-left wing special interest groups invading the party and enforcing their will upon party policy, who makes up the list, and even who is picked as the leader.

    Andrew Little isn’t the answer, he is part of the problem.

    Reply
  2. Iceberg

     /  29th April 2016

    They only have to answer a few simple questions to become relevant again.

    What do you want us to vote for and why?

    If it’s social justice that you want us to vote for, then first explain why hundreds of billions of transfer payments haven’t achieved it already?

    Reply
    • Kitty Catkin

       /  29th April 2016

      Labour seems to be stuck in the old days where t’bosses wor always them an’ t’workers wor allus us. I know a man who’s in his early 80s and neither looks it nor seems it in most ways-except for that. He’s a Yorkshireman from Sheffield, and that mentality will never leave him-that those with a lot of money have obtained it wrongly at the expense of the workers. Once a working-class Northern Englishman….he has risen from it by first going to grammar school and then becoming a teacher, but that attitude is still engrained.

      Reply
      • Iceberg

         /  29th April 2016

        Don’t agree. Labour haven’t represented workers for decades.

        They’re to “progressive” for dirty hands.

        Reply
        • Blazer

           /  29th April 2016

          too.

          Reply
          • Gezza

             /  29th April 2016

            Was there supposed to be a “me” in front of that?

            Reply
            • Kitty Catkin

               /  29th April 2016

              Really ? I imagined them to be still trying to present that image of workers’ rights as they did in the old days and wondered if that was the trouble-that and the fact that their busybody ways meant that school pools (among other things) were now more trouble than they were worth. A local one closed because the caretaker was supposed to go on a course in his own time and at his own cost (!) anf test the water an absurd number of times a day, as if he had nothing else to do all day.

              I remember when they wanted to make employers whose employees had to walk anywhere responsible if the employee tripped on anything on the way-and check the pavements to make sure that they were safe. And when a female worker went to a male worker’s place for lunch and a few drinks and he made a grab…guess who was liable ? The grabber ? The woman for going there, having the drinks and not leaving when the man was becoming amorous? The employer for not ensuring her safety although they had not known anything about the situation ? Yes, you’ve guessed it.No, I am not making these up.

          • Iceberg

             /  29th April 2016

            Don’t think you’ll get much disagreement on that.

            Now focus your attention on answering the questions to your previous witless assertions.

            Reply
        • Iceberg

           /  29th April 2016

          Sometimes Kitty, it’s like you’ve gone through the wardrobe, and you’re talking to the Lion and the Witch.

          Reply
          • Kitty Catkin

             /  30th April 2016

            Nobody would be speaking to them both at the same time, and certainly not about the NZ Labour Party.

            What was the supposed witless assertion ? The examples I gave were real ones, and I didn’t see any questions to which I was supposed to give an answer.Where were these questions ?

            Reply
  3. Gezza

     /  29th April 2016

    “incoherent Labour party”
    Yep. Incoherent has been my word for them for a wee while now.

    Reply
  4. Brown

     /  30th April 2016

    Their problems stem from Helen’s rule. A gaggle of gays and Marxists without ability is her legacy because anyone with ability was a threat to be disposed of. It amazes me that anyone would want this type of dictator running anything let alone the UN. Anyway, there is only room for one centre left party in NZ and National is it at present.

    Reply
    • Kitty Catkin

       /  30th April 2016

      I think that the assumption that being gay means that one is without ability is rather homophobic.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s