A decade since Shipley

34 comments on “A decade since Shipley ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Insolent Prick 1

   10 December 2007 at 4:36 pm

   Dancer,

   Thank you for the brilliant reminder about how tired third-term governments become out of touch, and out of reality, with the voters they’re supposed to represent.

   It is pleasing that Helen Clark has learned the lessons of all prior third-term government. We would never see her implementing policies or policy that is designed to pander to special interests at the expense of the majority. It is also very telling that Labour has had the good strategic sense to outlaw free speech by anybody other than the Labour Party. The wreckers and haters can’t be allowed to dominate the agenda, or prevent progress towards Helen’s vision for New Zealand. It is better to stop them from being involved in the political process completely, since the wreckers and haters are multiplying, and must be contained, for the good of New Zealand.

   It is Helen Clark’s ability to learn from history, along with her history teacher Minister of Finance, that are the main reasons that Labour is so far ahead in the polls that there really isn’t any economic sense in having an election next year.
2. the sprout 2

   10 December 2007 at 4:39 pm

   “I made it up” is my all time favourite Shipleyism. i bet John is really pissed he won’t be able to count on that one.

   IP, being a millionaire money trader who lives in a mansion in Parnell and who’s spent most of their lives out of NZ, does not an in touch politican make.
3. Matthew Pilott 3

   10 December 2007 at 4:44 pm

   Yawn – you get tiring real fast IP.

   Tell you what – you can save yourself hours, and everyone who reads your comments minutes, but just inserting the following in each thread.

   Insolent prick
   Date etc

   “Standard Anti-labour comment. Free speech going. Tired government. Anti-EB sentiment wrong. Pledge card. Theft and corruption. Bad poll. Losing in 2008. Key Handsome and Benevolent. Incompetance.

   Message ends”

   and we’ll know exactly what you mean, from having read the same comment on the past 187 threads. If someone read the comment and didn’t know what you meant, well, you could just redirect them to one of any number of your comments – they’re all the same after all.

   Might help with that RSI. Or are you a savvy cut’n’paster?
4. Insolent Prick 4

   10 December 2007 at 4:47 pm

   Sprout:

   As opposed to a millionaire former academic, living in a mansion in Wellington, who has never had a job out of Parliament since leaving university?
5. Robinsod 5

   10 December 2007 at 4:47 pm

   That’s not how Prick got his RSI Matt…
6. Matthew Pilott 6

   10 December 2007 at 4:53 pm

   OK sod now I believe him about the you-stalking-him claim…

   I’m actually crying tears of laughter! :L

   Cap: Palmer Was – i shit you not!!
7. dancer 7

   10 December 2007 at 4:57 pm

   IP – i think there are real challenges for any government in a third term. It is probably to the Labour governments advantage that they were able to learn the importance of stability, and the premium on negotiating a mulit-party environment from watching National stumble through it’s first term of MMP govt. however i think to suggest Helen Clark is looking as out of touch as Mrs Shipley was at the end of her reign is wishful thinking. Helen Clark maintains an incredibly tough regional visit programme for the very reason that she knows the value of talking to people away from metropolitan areas, and with policies (love them or hate them) like kiwisaver, 20 hours free pre-school for 3 and 4 year olds, and talk of tax cuts i don’t think you can credibly say they’ve run out of ideas either.
8. Pascal's bookie 8

   10 December 2007 at 5:04 pm

   Perhaps IP could give us some highlights from Shipley’s administration that compare with the policies this government has manged to introduce in it’s troubled third term?
9. The Double Standard 9

   10 December 2007 at 5:06 pm

   Oh how sad that H1 didn’t get to be first female PM. I’m surprised y’all are so bitter about it really.

   I liked “by definition I cannot leak” from Clark.
10. the sprout 10

    10 December 2007 at 5:11 pm

    sounds of National Research Unit searching frantically…
11. Robinsod 11

    10 December 2007 at 5:22 pm

    Hey DPFDblDStdClaws, you still haven’t explained why you used my witticism as your handle – would you care to elucidate now? Is it ‘cos you love me?

    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2007/11/little_may_stand.html#comment-360421
12. Billy 12

    10 December 2007 at 5:29 pm

    “I liked “by definition I cannot leak””

    My personal favourite was:

    “Allegations of corruption are intolerable in a Western liberal democracy.”
13. Pascal's bookie 13

    10 December 2007 at 5:30 pm

    I’m keen on the answer to that too robinsod. Maybe it’s like those kids that throw mud at the kids they secretly like.

    Did they really come up with ‘Standardistas’ by themselves? ’cause that’s actually pretty good.
14. Pascal's bookie 14

    10 December 2007 at 5:32 pm

    Billy, for sheer stupid though you can’t beat ‘radical conservative’. You’ve got to admit.

    It still makes me laugh.
15. the sprout 15

    10 December 2007 at 5:35 pm

    ‘radical conservative’

    they’re the ones that wear their 1000 dollar armani shirts un-tucked
16. Tane 16

    10 December 2007 at 5:36 pm

    Did they really come up with ‘Standardistas’ by themselves?

    No, that was made up by a lefty too, redbus I think. I actually commented at the time that I liked it, so I’m stoked to see TDS etc picking it up.

    But yeah, not an original thought between them.
17. Billy 17

    10 December 2007 at 5:46 pm

    Or thi slittle gem about TPF:

    “I think the only thing he is probably guilty of is trying to be helpful to someone.”

    Wonder if we still think that?
18. Insolent Prick 18

    10 December 2007 at 5:47 pm

    PB,

    I’ve been racking my brain, and as shoddy arrogant, and unfit for office the last year or so of the Shipley government was, I can’t think of any policy implementation that she did that comes close to the outrageous corruption of the Electoral Finance Bill.

    If you’re really looking for comparisons for disgraceful government and desperately trying to hold onto power when you’re beaten, you probably have to go back to Muldoon refusing to devalue the dollar in 1984, and Caygill, Palmer and Clark presenting the 1990 budget, supposedly in surplus, with full knowledge that the BNZ collapse was about to turn the surplus into a massive deficit.

    The Alamein Kopu incident was pretty shameful, but no more than Helen holding onto TPF for as long as she could. McCully should have been disciplined over the tourism fiasco, but that pales in comparison compared to respective fuck-ups of Benson-Pope, Mallard, and Parker.

    This government is rotten to its very core. Anybody who has watched the demise of other governments in New Zealand can see that pretty starkly.
19. r0b 19

    10 December 2007 at 6:05 pm

    IP – you ping The Standard for a focus on John Key, but your own obsession with the EFB is truly a wonder to behold. I think I get it though – there is nothing else substantial to criticise this productive and successful third term Labour-led government on. And there is no National policy to discuss. So this is all you’ve got.

    As to the EFB, why not read what the party leaders say about it in there own words? (Well – almost their own words – The Herald did censor the Green contribution):

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10481042&pnum=0

    Seems like the overwhelming majority of our political leaders are in favour of the EFB. In fact, the only ones opposed are those with a vested interest in buying elections.

    So cease this sad attempt at a threadjack (he said, more in hope than in anticipation), and stay on topic. Shipley’s administration. What a fiasco that was eh?
20. Pascal's bookie 20

    10 December 2007 at 6:40 pm

    So you can’t think of any policies Shipley achieved either then Prick.

    Maybe that’s what radical conservative means.
21. Robinsod 21

    10 December 2007 at 6:50 pm

    C’mon guys – the privatisation of the electricity sector. That’s been a Shipwreck gift that just keeps on giving. Oh and I liked it when she got into a habit of $600 a night hotel accommodation while simultaneously telling beneficiaries they should just tighten their belts and grow a vege garden (admittedly she was minister for social welfare then). Oh and speaking of that was she at the minister in charge when benefits were cut? Which I’ve gotta say has also been a gift that keeps giving – and Labour should be ashamed of that.
22. Insolent Prick 22

    10 December 2007 at 6:52 pm

    r0b: by “overwhelming majority of Party Leaders”, you mean Helen Clark, Peter Dunne, Russel Norman, and Winston Peters. Since you’ve decided to include Jim Anderton, who has a caucus of precisely one, then you might as well include Gordon Copeland and Taito Phillip Field. On those numbers, 5/9 parties are opposed to the EFB.

    Of the actual parties, 4/7 support the EFB. That’s not an “overwhelming majority”. You might want to consider that only those parties that are supporting the EFB are currently facing a hammering in the polls.
23. Robinsod 23

    10 December 2007 at 6:58 pm

    Hey Prick. No more EFB on this thread, eh?
24. Insolent Prick 24

    10 December 2007 at 6:58 pm

    That’s right, Robinsod. Helen Clark is well known to bunk in youth hostels with one of her staff when she makes a rare international trip, so as to economise on travel costs. Helen Clark is also famous for restoring benefit levels to their levels prior to the 1991 cuts.

    I don’t know which part of the country you live in, Robinsod, but my electricity has not been privatised. Along with the vast majority of New Zealanders, my electricity generator, retailer, and transmission network are all state-owned. Being state-owned hasn’t exactly seen a reduction in my power bill. My lines company is owned by a community trust, as it had been prior to the Bradford energy reforms.

    For somebody who was so critical of my pre-1984 political history, Robinsod, you don’t appear to have much of a grasp of recent political history.
25. Robinsod 25

    10 December 2007 at 7:10 pm

    IP – it doesn’t matter that you happen to have state providers. The system has been cut up deregulated and a good part of it has been sold off. All of these parts work against each other. It’s called market failure and thanks to you mate Shippers and her pal Max it’s pretty much irreparable.
26. Insolent Prick 26

    10 December 2007 at 7:46 pm

    So, RObinsod, your much-hated reforms, enacted ten years ago, which contrary to your earlier claim of “privatisation”, have not been sold off save a small part of the generation network to encourage competition, were so odious that ten years after the fact, Labour has done NOTHING to change them?
27. Robinsod 27

    10 December 2007 at 7:51 pm

    It take a lot less time to burn down a house than rebuild one.
28. ak 28

    10 December 2007 at 8:29 pm

    “That’s not how Prick got his RSI Matt.”

    Nor his name…an insistent breathy eponym echoes with every comment…
29. r0b 29

    10 December 2007 at 8:57 pm

    “Of the actual parties, 4/7 support the EFB.”

    IP, you’re a smart guy, You should be able to count better than that. In that article there are 5 party leaders in favour, and 2 against (with the Maori party seemingly undecided).

    But anyway – third term governments. They usually tear themselves apart (e.g. Shipley’s – or “Ship of fools” as I called them back in the day). This third term Labour led government is conspicuously not self destructing. It is still disciplined and cohesive. It is still developing and acting on policy. It is still in good spirits. It is managing a process of internal renewal with remarkable maturity. All in all it’s a class act. Yes, Labour is behind in the polls at the moment, for what it’s worth, but only a fool would write them off.
30. burt 30

    10 December 2007 at 10:18 pm

    What IP said way back here: http://www.thestandard.org.nz/?p=842#comment-9112
31. the sprout 31

    10 December 2007 at 10:23 pm

    brt, your comments are barely scan-worthy as they are, but posting a link to a quote from IP?
    i mean really – you’re even more deluded than i am.
32. burt 32

    10 December 2007 at 11:09 pm

    Robinsod

    It take a lot less time to burn down a house than rebuild one.

    So what you are saying is that National gave the SOE power generators and transmission companies a profit mandate and after 8 years of Labour govt it gets stronger and stronger as the consumers pay more and more.

    Wow, that’s proactive management, take the maximum profit and blame the previous govt – wow – excellent example of protecting the interests of the poorest NZ people.
33. PhilBest 33

    11 December 2007 at 10:55 am

    I’ve long believed that if the Nats had kept Shipley, she’d have been a much more effective counter to Helen Clark than the gentlemanly nice guy types they’ve had instead, and she’d probably have been PM again by now.
34. Phil 34

    13 December 2007 at 12:55 pm

    I couldn’t disagree more Philbest.

    Anyone who leads a campaign with “It’s time for a change” as it’s slogan, when you’ve been in power for nine years, is either

    a) showing a suprising ammount of faith in the intelligence of the electorate
    or b) breathtakingly incompetent in matters of political strategy

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS