The Green Party list

73 comments on “The Green Party list ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Psycho Milt 1

   17 April 2020 at 8:15 am

   Beats me what Jan Logie's done to be ranked above Eugenie Sage.

   And Ricardo Menendez March reminds me of Rik from the Young Ones every time I see him speaking on TV.

   That said, I'm not a member so my opinions don't count for much.
   • Chris 1.1

     17 April 2020 at 10:08 am

     Sage would be more at home in the right wing faction of the Labour Party.
     • weka 1.1.1

       17 April 2020 at 10:49 am

       She's also the only candidate in the top ten from the South Island, which imo is a problem.

       (although Logie is an Invercargill girl)
2. Marcus Morris 2

   17 April 2020 at 8:50 am

   Surprised that Julie-Anne Genter is only at six. What has Jan Logie done. Must check. Interesting that seven of the first ten are female. I have no actual problem with that but I always though that gender balance was a key issue when the list was made up.
   • Marcus Morris 2.1

     17 April 2020 at 9:19 am

     Should have read the introductory paragraph more carefully. This is clearly not the final list.
   • weka 2.2

     17 April 2020 at 10:02 am

     I'm a little unclear about the gender balance rule. I think it applies to the whole list, but that the final adjustment processes might take it into account for the top ten or however many as well. I also suspect that it's not such a bit deal for the GP compared to other parties as they tend to recruit and support awesome women.
     • Herodotus 2.2.1

       17 April 2020 at 10:56 am

       I see as lot of Activists there BUT perhaps they need to read the Green Party of Aotearoa "About Us" and the1st 2 points "The green movement is driven by people who know that protecting our planet and supporting our communities go hand in hand. " As the list appears a little thin on The Green aspect "Protecting our planet ", this phrase also starts off para 2. Eugenie Sage is for me about the only 1 on the list that could be considered a Primarily Environmental activist first – the others secondary.
       • weka 2.2.1.1

         17 April 2020 at 12:26 pm

         I'd say Shaw and Genter are more environmental too. Can't say about Swarbrick, because I think she is of the generation that have integreated social/environmental seamlessly.

         Given the GP kaupapa is that social justice and environmental justice are inextricably entwined, this is written into the Principles/Charter, and the party's policy reflects that, I don't see how it is possible for the MPs to end up being overloaded one way or the other. It's not like the social justice activists are going to not be working within that kaupapa.

         You can't protect the planet without addressing social/economic justice. The first line of the About makes it clear,

         The green movement is driven by people who know that protecting our planet and supporting our communities go hand in hand.

         https://www.greens.org.nz/about

         From the Charter, and notice how each flows into the next and from the one before,

         Ecological Wisdom

         The basis of ecological wisdom is that human beings are part of the natural world. This world is finite, therefore unlimited material growth is impossible. Ecological sustainability is paramount.

         Social Responsibility

         Unlimited material growth is impossible. Therefore the key to social responsibility is the just distribution of social and natural resources, both locally and globally.

         Appropriate Decision-making

         For the implementation of ecological wisdom and social responsibility, decisions will be made directly at the appropriate level by those affected.

         Non-Violence

         Non-violent conflict resolution is the process by which ecological wisdom, social responsibility and appropriate decision making will be implemented. This principle applies at all levels.

         https://www.greens.org.nz/charter
         • Herodotus 2.2.1.1.1

           17 April 2020 at 2:08 pm

           In the 3 intro paragraphs "Protect/ing the planet " is consistent followed by: "and supporting our communities","and make sure everyone is treated equally" and "and build fairer communities"

           History "…active members of the Values Party, the world's first national-level environmentalist party"

           From this I gather that Being an Environmentalist party is the guiding philosophy from which the social follows/dovetails. I gather that this has taken a back seat from the 3 new candidates and that you (Weka) did not mention any "Environmental" aspects to their background- perhaps due to limiting the post perhaps it is of less importance to these 3 ? But that is only my impression.
           • solkta 2.2.1.1.1.1

             17 April 2020 at 2:36 pm

             Perhaps you need to do some reading about the Values Party. Plenty of social policy there. You are still trying to interpret this in a linear cartesian manner rather than a holistic dialectical hegelian manner. Not "this then that" but "this and this".

             The Values Manifesto Beyond Tomorrow can be viewed here:

             https://www.globalgreens.org/green-party-platforms-programs-and-manifestos/nz_values_1975
             • solkta …

               17 April 2020 at 2:45 pm

               Funny to read that now with all the archaic and ironic sexist language:

               Population growth, economic growth and use of resources must be restricted if society is to meet the needs of man.

               The task ahead is not to assimilate the Maori but to help him foster his racial and cultural identity.

               Cringe city.
         • Grafton Gully 2.2.1.1.2

           17 April 2020 at 4:50 pm

           Reading this makes me realise how unelectable the party is and also the "OK boomer" comment.
           • Forget now 2.2.1.1.2.1

             17 April 2020 at 5:34 pm

             Which "OK boomer" comment? Maybe it's the comment system glitching the position of your reply, because I can't see that phrase anywhere in this thread.

             Though it always strikes me as strange that; those who are readiest to dismiss "Snowflakey Millennials", are quickest to take offence at ageism directed back their way. Like "RFs" who are happy to dish out their opinions of TIMs and TIFs, but get offended when others call them TERFs.
             • weka …

               17 April 2020 at 6:06 pm

               Swarbrick said 'OK Boomer' to a Nat MP in the House who was hassling her. I don't really have a problem with that, but the bullshit online around and since that time needed to stop. There is no doubt that 'ok boomer' is generally ageist and classist. I notice hardly anyone is using it now that old people are actually dying.
     • solkta 2.2.2

       17 April 2020 at 11:30 am

       Still a big deal as it is now working in favour of the men.
       • weka 2.2.2.1

         17 April 2020 at 11:59 am

         how so? Three men in the top ten, six in the top fifteen.
         • solkta 2.2.2.1.1

           17 April 2020 at 12:09 pm

           There could be less.
           • weka 2.2.2.1.1.1

             17 April 2020 at 12:16 pm

             Lol. What's the gender balance like within the party once you get past the co-whatevers?
   • AB 2.3

     17 April 2020 at 5:02 pm

     "Surprised that Julie-Anne Genter is only at six."

     If the MMP threshold is 5% – then if you reach it, you automatically get 6 MPs (5% of 120). So positions 1-6 are effectively equivalent in electoral terms. (I agree on the optics of it though.)
3. Forget now 3

   17 April 2020 at 9:36 am

   Some points that Weka omitted (perhaps for the sake of brevity). Both TT & RMM (I am not typing out every name in full – read the OP and it should be obvious who I am denoting) were on the initial 2017 GP list, though not in the top ten. EK wasn't on the initial list (IL) at all, but was on the EL (election list – and contested a Maori electorate seat):

   https://www.greens.org.nz/green-party-thrilled-announce-initial-2017-party-list

   With four of the "final" list (FL) dropping out before the election; MT#1, KG#8, DC#16, plus Ruthven#2?; TT was at #16 on the EL, EK#19 & RMM#21.

   I assume what happened was that EK got slotted in to fill the empty space on the FL that was left when Ruthven split because she couldn't be bothered contributing the time to the GP if she wasn't going to have a decent chance at a parliamentary seat. Then after Turei's demonstration of just how much NZ loves to Bash the Bennies, and her subordinates subsequent disloyalty, everyone was bumped up three slots on the EL from the FL.
   • weka 3.1

     17 April 2020 at 10:06 am

     I'll have a proper read of that later when I've got time to parse the abbreviations, but using last names instead of initials would have made that much easier to read.

     The post is about the top ten initial list, because that's where the MPs will come from (or if we are lucky the top 15.

     When talking about 2017, there were three lists, the initial, the final, and then the adjusted final. It's a little hard to tell which of the last two you are referring to.
     • Forget now 3.1.1

       17 April 2020 at 10:21 am

       Okay, now I look at it; perhaps I did go a little overboard on the initialisations. EL and EK in particular being way to similar. IL denotes the; initial list, FL; final list, & EL revised final list (ie election list).

       TLDR is that:

       • Tuiono was number 16 on the 2017 revised final list
       • Kerekere number 19
       • March number 21

       So they are not exactly new faces to Green Party members; who determine the final list ranking (barring another implosion like last election – and just please don't!). Even though they may not be widely known to the population at large.
       • weka 3.1.1.1

         17 April 2020 at 10:47 am

         Yep. Implied in the post that the 'new' was the position in the top ten, interesting also given the shifting of existing MPs.
4. Herodotus 4

   17 April 2020 at 10:29 am

   Don't know if there has been any changes to the rules, but as I read it the rules apply to the list not sections e.g. top 5 or 10 MUST comply with ….

   https://elections.nz/assets/Party-files/gp-candidate-selection-and-list-ranking.pdf
   • weka 4.1

     17 April 2020 at 10:46 am

     That's how I read it too but theoretically that could mean the top ten might be all men. So I assume there are processes within the other parts of listmaking that take into account the need to not have that happen.
     • solkta 4.1.1

       17 April 2020 at 11:27 am

       The gender balance thing is usually applied in bands of 5 and 10 where possible. In recent years this has not been achievable as there has been so many high calibre female candidates. I think this is more a best practice guideline than a 'rule'.
       • Herodotus 4.1.1.1

         17 April 2020 at 11:36 am

         Having 2 sitting male MP's "quit/leave/expel" didn't help the balance.
         • Forget now 4.1.1.1.1

           17 April 2020 at 12:36 pm

           Only Turei and Graham had any chance of being elected.

           Outside of Northland, Clendon was mostly despised by GP members – I know I wasn't impressed when I talked to him out at Turei's tower. But his final list ranking gave him little chance of being re-elected anyway. Though more than Ruthven that's for sure.

           But those who chose to "quit/ leave/ expel" in 2017 did not really alter the gender balance: #1 Female, #8 Male, #16 Male, #23(?) Female.

           Though Kerekere's late inclusion did bring in a much needed LBQT+ gender perspective. Have we had a takutapui MP since Beyer?
       • bwaghorn 4.1.1.2

         17 April 2020 at 12:10 pm

         Ha ha if a man used that line hed be hung drawn and quartered
         • solkta 4.1.1.2.1

           17 April 2020 at 12:13 pm

           Not sure what you mean.
         • weka 4.1.1.2.2

           17 April 2020 at 12:15 pm

           not really. It's the men arguing that we don't need gender balancing tools because we should choose people on merit (and thus implying that men are better than women) that get shit. Rightfully so.

           I'm really pleased that the GP has high calibre men too, but there are good reasons why we need more women in parliament and the party than men at the moment.
           • KJT 4.1.1.2.2.1

             17 April 2020 at 2:03 pm

             Well. I would argue for selecting on merit.

             But, my party list would be mostly women. We've been gifted with many competent and intelligent women, candidates.

             However, I value a facilitative style of leadership. Which seems to be more common with women. At least on our prospective candidates.

             😊
             • weka …

               17 April 2020 at 3:25 pm

               "Well. I would argue for selecting on merit."

               Yes, but I didn't argue against that. I argued against people who think there should be no gender, ethinicity etc adjustments because merit alone should be enough. The implication is that men dominate parliament because they are more meritorious than women. I've seen men argue this, albeit they soften it by saying that not as many women step up or they go off and have babies or something.
             • weka …

               17 April 2020 at 3:27 pm

               "However, I value a facilitative style of leadership. Which seems to be more common with women. At least on our prospective candidates."

               Yep. There's some interesting reports of the differences between men and women in positions of leadership in response to climate change. I won't be surprised if this is true for the pandemic too.
             • Marcus Morris …

               18 April 2020 at 10:17 am

               Agreed. Was very sorry when Kennedy Graham withdrew. His loss was huge although I disagreed with his reason for going. It was hugely damaging. James Shaw is, IMO very good value but I could never really take Gareth Hughes seriously. From the incomparable Jeanette Fitzsimons onwards there has been a long line of outstanding woman "front liners".
               • KJT …

                 18 April 2020 at 10:20 am

                 I used to like Kennedy.

                 Hugely disappointed with him when he "threw his toys out of the cot".

                 I expected the hypocrisy from the usual suspects.

                 Not from someone within the party.
5. mickysavage 5

   17 April 2020 at 11:55 am

   Speaking as a long term Labour activist in the New Lynn electorate can I say I have met Steve Abel on a number of occasions. He is bright and very dedicated, has done a huge amount of work for Greenpeace and has been very active in local issues relating to tree protection.

   I would really like to see him in Parliament where I think he would be great although you will understand if I say not as the MP for New Lynn …
   • weka 5.1

     17 April 2020 at 12:01 pm

     I'm sure he will be happy to be a list MP 🙂 Fingers crossed for at least 9.5% then.
   • OnceWasTim 5.2

     17 April 2020 at 9:28 pm

     Not on account of anything in particular except that I'm seriously considering a Labour->Green conversion, but is he related to Sue? (also bright and dedicated and a number of other people/community type things)
6. Wayne 6

   17 April 2020 at 1:00 pm

   As someone who is obviously not of the Green persuasion, It seems strange to me that Julie Anne Genter and Chloe Swarbrick are so lowly ranked. And that Jan Logie is so high.

   Chloe Swarbrick, just about more than anyone else, comes across as the modern face of the Greens, and has very high visibility. She is now dependent on the Greens getting 6%.

   Yes, the Greens may have a lot more women MP's as a percentage, but so what. Surely electability matters. And that means putting the top team at the top.
   • Andre 6.1

     17 April 2020 at 1:08 pm

     Wayne, have you got any thoughts on the proportion of the top tenners whose public image is biased towards social activism versus those more biased towards green activism?
     • Wayne 6.1.1

       17 April 2020 at 1:26 pm

       The two I did mention are more identified as green activists rather than social activists. I was a bit surprised at how much social activism was predominating. I know of course about the green mantra about the conjoining of the two. But in the mind of voters, including I imagine most Green Party voters, the very name of the party suggest that environmental activism should dominate.
       • Andre 6.1.1.1

         17 April 2020 at 1:35 pm

         Thanks. FWIW, as a very likely Green voter, but not party member, my reaction was similar.
         • weka 6.1.1.1.1

           17 April 2020 at 3:30 pm

           Do you perceive the Greens as not leading on environmental issues? Is there any particular reason you think the three new candidates (or any of the top ten) might not be dedicated to that?

           One good reason to have the social justice people there is to help build a movement of people who are being left behind. We need those people to get on board with climate change and the ecological crisis as much as anyone else.
   • Incognito 6.2

     17 April 2020 at 1:11 pm

     Yes, electability matters, of course. However, spinning a good yarn on the hustings and online doesn’t necessarily mean being able to operate effectively and efficiently in-between elections, be it in Government or on the Opposition benches.

     It seems to me the Greens tend to look more at/to what’s between than at (the) elections per se. Whether this is a wise strategy that pays (them) political dividend is up for debate.
   • Forget now 6.3

     17 April 2020 at 1:27 pm

     I think you fundamentally misunderstand the purpose of the initial list rankings there, Wayne. These are the candidates that are being presented to the GP members (which no longer includes me, at least not at this time and you need to have been a member for 6months to vote anyway). The party membership at large are not necessarily as familiar with every candidate as are the party co-coordinators.

     So, rather than putting all the sitting MPs at the top of the list and getting automatic votes from name recognition, the initial list is carefully crafted over the course of months at regional and national GP conferences. The purpose is to present candidate options to the voters that seem both in line with the party's ethos, but may not be immediately recognisable outside their particular area of activity.

     I assume that it is specifically because Logie had been so diligent in a low profile role that she has been promoted above Swarbrick who has a higher public profile. Not having attended any of these conferences this time I cannot be certain of course, but that would be consistent with previous lists. I understand that this is not the way that the National party does it, but you have to admit that there are more fresh faces in each GP caucus.

     "For the good of the world, rather than the individual!"
     • weka 6.3.1

       17 April 2020 at 3:32 pm

       Nice one, thanks. I love how posts like these bring out good knowledge sharing from Greens in the comments.

       "the initial list is carefully crafted over the course of months at regional and national GP conferences."

       Ah, had missed this part of it.
   • infused 6.4

     17 April 2020 at 3:31 pm

     Green's selection process is not about putting the best at the top. It's about ticking arbitrary boxes to keep a loud few happy.
     • adam 6.4.1

       17 April 2020 at 3:45 pm

       nationals's selection process is not about putting the best at the top. It's about ticking arbitrary boxes to keep the money men happy.
       • Incognito 6.4.1.1

         17 April 2020 at 3:59 pm

         TS’s self-selection and commentary process is not about putting the best at the top or out there. It’s about making arbitrary comments to keep the commenters happy.
         • adam 6.4.1.1.1

           17 April 2020 at 4:10 pm

           You should be locked up more incognito – your getting this humor thing.
           • Incognito 6.4.1.1.1.1

             17 April 2020 at 4:26 pm

             I have home detention but my mind is as free as a flightless bird.
             • Drowsy M. Kram …

               17 April 2020 at 5:07 pm

               "As soon as birds do not need to fly, there is selection against flight."
               https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flightless_birds

               NZ's Covid-19 elimination strategy is an attractive and academic idea. Right now we're largely battling human behaviour; Covid-19 battle comes later.

               Oops, off topic: With at least six people (probably more, but I don’t know enough about some of them) of proven principle in their preliminary top ten list, the Greens have my party vote (and have had it a while) – easy choice.
               • Incognito …

                 17 April 2020 at 5:22 pm

                 Let’s hope we haven’t pissed off the Author of this Post; I’m spreading my wee wings 😉

                 There’s much to like about the Greens and their preliminary Party List. One thing that has bothered me for a while is that they don’t seem to be able or want to get out of the groove of being a ‘support party’ to Labour. Maybe the Greens could (should?) act like a critic & conscience of Labour instead of a silent minor partner?
                 • Drowsy M. Kram …

                   17 April 2020 at 5:44 pm

                   Like your idea of a 'critic and conscience' role, but that must be a fine line to walk in politics. Would Labour "give a little whistle" to the Greens? And whatever happened to Jiminy Cricket?
                   • Incognito …

                     17 April 2020 at 5:55 pm

                     🙂

                     It is possible that the Greens have been moving mountains behind the scenes and been more influential than we, the public, realise without wanting to claim credit or draw attention to the fact. However, without becoming a thorn in Labour’s conscience, the Greens need to give voters a good reason to vote for them. Something that sets them apart, in a good way, from Labour without portraying Labour as an Evil Doom’s Day Cult.
                   • weka …

                     17 April 2020 at 6:02 pm

                     The Greens were gearing up early in the year for this. They started doing social media and press releases making clear statements different from the government.

                     I hope they can get back to that ahead of the election, although timing is everything right now.
                 • weka …

                   17 April 2020 at 6:03 pm

                   "Maybe the Greens could (should?) act like a critic & conscience of Labour instead of a silent minor partner?"

                   how do you see that being done?
                   • Incognito …

                     17 April 2020 at 6:16 pm

                     TBH, I have very little idea; was just thinking aloud (brain farts).

                     The Greens lack political profile and media attention IMO. Of course, to get attention they could say something outrageous or post a photo of a Green MP fishing or hunting in their backyard.

                     They need to raise their profile in MSM (make more noise) without becoming like the other political parties (noise polluters).

                     I know the Greens’ way is building/seeking consensus but it is ok to speak up/out against Labour if no consensus was or could be reached. The Greens don’t hang out the dirty laundry, which is a good thing, but their relative silence can be perceived as being (too?) agreeable with Labour.

                     I haven’t thought deeply about this, as you can tell; had and have other things that occupy my mind.
                   • weka …

                     17 April 2020 at 6:47 pm

                     I'm a bit brain dead tonight, but I think it's a topic worth exploring in depth. Esp how the Greens could do this without buying into macho politics.
                   • solkta …

                     17 April 2020 at 6:49 pm

                     It's a hard one. The Greens can't pull the rug out from under Labour to get attention like Winston so likes to do.
                   • Incognito []

                     18 April 2020 at 8:21 pm

                     They could, but that would turn them into NZ Greens First.
     • solkta 6.4.2

       17 April 2020 at 3:53 pm

       to keep a loud few happy

       And how would you know this? On what basis do you come to this conclusion? Have you been an active Green Party member?
     • Marcus Morris 6.4.3

       18 April 2020 at 11:22 am

       That is BS. While I am no longer a paid up member of the party I found Jeanette Fitzsimons an inspiration and joined. During two election cycles I was an electorate representative on the List selection process. You may have had similar experiences and perhaps you or I missed something but your statement above is, in my opinion, totally without substance. Balance between gender, geography and ethnicity are important considerations, and so they should be, but they are not the be all and end all. One of the frustrations of going to GP meeting and conferences was the length taken to make truly democratic decisions and overall consensus.
7. Blazer 7

   17 April 2020 at 2:02 pm

   'So, rather than putting all the sitting MPs at the top of the list and getting automatic votes from name recognition, the initial list is carefully crafted over the course of months at regional and national GP conferences. The purpose is to present candidate options to the voters that seem both in line with the party's ethos, but may not be immediately recognisable outside their particular area of activity.'

   on that basis why bother ranking them at..all?
   • Forget now 7.1

     17 April 2020 at 2:28 pm

     Yeh, I really messed up the grammar there didn't I? "… that seem; both in line with the party's ethos, and; capable of working cooperatively within the caucus, but…" would be a lot better, though I can't recall now the exact phrasing I intended now.

     Apologies for the incompetence.
8. adam 8

   17 April 2020 at 4:06 pm

   Good to see Jan being recognised for her hard work. I know she does her utmost not to promote herself in anyway. But as far an MP's who reads widely (especially for committee work), helps constituents, answers questions, and does a lot of the hard graft – others could learn from Jan.
   • weka 8.1

     17 April 2020 at 6:07 pm

     Yeah, I'm kind of surprised at the people surprised here, but I assume it's because she doesn't blow her own horn so most people don't know much about her. She always strikes me as good value and I'd vote to keep her up the list.
9. Ad 9

   17 April 2020 at 4:16 pm

   Best of luck to them and I sure hope they do better than last time.
10. Corey Humm 10

    17 April 2020 at 5:26 pm

    I'm still angry that Mojo Mathers was ranked below Golriz , no issue with Golriz but Mojo was an amazing advocate for the disabled community and a SI mp.

    I strategically voted for them last election, but after they gave their parliamentary questions to the Nats (giving the nats an even bigger stick to hit the govt with) I'm not sure,they are on the borderline poll wise where I probably will have to suck it up and vote for them again.

    Ricardo is a nice addition, he's cool apart from him Chloe the rest are a bit meh and could easily be in labour , I miss the old Donald era greens,Im grenot thea fan of the leadership (John key in a green tie and the only thing I like about Marama is that she triggers the right but she's very meh) isn't the greens front bench supposed to be gender balanced? I believe we need more women in politics, but surely there another bloke or two wouldn't hurt, the greens bled so many male votes last election to TOP and Lab. Not a lot of difference or new energy for a party in desperate need or attention and relevance of it wants to break the coalition curse. We'll see what the policies are I suppose
    • weka 10.1

      17 April 2020 at 6:11 pm

      I agree about MM, that was a real loss. When the list was voted on and adjusted, hard to imagine then that the Greens would drop so many votes.

      There's some discussion upthread about the gender balance.

      I honestly don't think it would make much difference if the mix was different or it was different people. NZers who support the GP have long not translated that into votes. It's weird. They still have the most left wing policies of any party in parliament.
      • Forget now 10.1.1

        17 April 2020 at 7:01 pm

        There was also some resistance to Mathers from those GP members who were not onside with her opposition to animal testing.

        I am not saying many GP members are openly pro-vivisection, it certainly made for some; interesting, discussions at times. However, many are scientifically literate and know that unpleasant activities can be necessary at times to progress learning. Putting your head up and saying so out loud was a bit of a plea for ostricisation, but that doesn't mean that many didn't disagree with Mathers stance on the quiet.
11. Lettuce 11

    18 April 2020 at 4:26 pm

    "Ricardo Menendez March is an anti-poverty activist, who has been working with Auckland Action Against Poverty on liveable incomes, housing, WINZ culture, and access to healthcare. He is standing as Green Party candidate in the Maungakiekie electorate."

    Oh fantastic! I live in the Maungakiekie electorate. In the 2017 election, National's awful Denise Lee won with 15,063 votes. Labour's Priyanca Radhakrishnan got 12,906 votes and Chloe Swarbrick got 4060 votes for a combined total of 16,966 votes, which would have been enough to win the seat.

    So it looks like we'll get saddled with Denise again. Thanks a bunch Greens. Can't Labour and the Greens work out an arrangement not to compete against each other in a few close seats? National could hardly cry foul after they've kept Act on life support in Epsom for the last 10 years.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS