Blast from the past

37 comments on “Blast from the past ”

• Comments are now closed

1. IrishBill 1

   9 October 2009 at 4:53 pm

   What I hate is the way he slams immigrants and foreign investment in the same breath. All it does is tarnish valid criticism of foreign investment by linking it in with racism in people’s minds. Thus you get inane accusations of xenophobia when any step is taken to impede the flogging off of NZ assets to overseas interests.
   • toad 1.1

     9 October 2009 at 8:51 pm

     Indeed, IB.

     Enoch Peters has really hamstrung the Greens’ ability to address foreign investment, for fear of being lumped in with Peters hate of immigrants.

     If he’s seriously back on the political stage, this is something the Greens need to look closely at for the next election campaign. They cannot afford to downplay the foreign investment issue – a good policy and a vote winner – for fear of being lumped in with Enoch Peters.

     The Greens must develop a political strategy to differentiate the issues.
2. Winston 2

   9 October 2009 at 4:58 pm

   How dare you admonish my attempt to galvanise the disenfranchised people of New Zealand.

   For too long there has been too many immigrents coming into the courtey who dont agree with my bigoted, racist rants. How do you expect my support base to increase if we allow intelligent foreigners to mingle with folks in this country that already think for themsleves and act for the common good.

   I implore you Eddie to follow Helens lead and support my crackpot ideas.
   • gobsmacked 2.1

     9 October 2009 at 5:02 pm

     Helen never did. Hence Peters’ compulsory silence on the issue, 2005 – 2008.

     History, fail.
3. gobsmacked 3

   9 October 2009 at 4:59 pm

   Yes, it’s bigotry, and it’s not even clever bigotry.

   There is a constituency out there of grumpy conservatives, unhappy with Key. But heading the talkback Top Ten are smacking and Mowrees and MPs’ expenses, plus the usual “Nanny State” stuff. Immigration is way down the list nowadays.

   He’s going nowhere if he just sings that tired old song.
4. Johnty Rhodes 4

   9 October 2009 at 5:04 pm

   This will be a worry for Labour, 2-3% wasted vote for the left.
   Go Winnie go.

   [lprent: Always interesting to see old hacks at it. Johnty is a good example of someone with a very limited phrase book, (so is Winnie) ]
5. BLiP 5

   9 October 2009 at 5:14 pm

   Don’t get me wrong, Winston Peters is without doubt a malignant canker on the body politic – but – he does gather the knuggle-dragging white trash and their fellow Maori racists together in one place and has the potential to fracture the Right. No?
   • SHG 5.1

     9 October 2009 at 5:33 pm

     The enemy of my enemy is not my friend, ESPECIALLY when it’s Winston Peters.

     Dear Winston, please die in a fire.
     • BLiP 5.1.1

       9 October 2009 at 5:36 pm

       Yeah, you’re right . . . I’m just thinking out loud, really.
   • Lanthanide 5.2

     9 October 2009 at 5:39 pm

     Yes, I agree. I think it became quite clear 1/2 way through the election coverage on the night that without NZ First getting in, Labour was highly likely to lose to a NACT coalition.

     Has anyone run the numbers of what would have happened if Winston had won his seat, all else being equal? It may just stack up such that a Labour + NZ First + Maori Party + Greens + Jim Anderton coalition could pip NACT at the post, although it would seem to be a rather unwieldy agreement.
     • BLiP 5.2.1

       9 October 2009 at 6:41 pm

       I can imagine Helen would’ve been able to manage such a coalition. However, given that the National Ltd spin machine has leapt into action at the merest mention of Peters, I’m beginning to wonder if perhaps his possible encore is of use to the Left.

       Interesting to see Hooton using the word “interesting” – reminds me of wee Timmy currently sitting on the naughty spot – has anyone seen the pair of them in the same room at the same time . . . just asking.
6. kiwteen123 6

   9 October 2009 at 5:39 pm

   I propose a blanket media ban on Winston Peters and NZ First. If he gets no coverage from the MSM or blogs he has no chance of getting in and ruining our country.
   • lprent 6.1

     9 October 2009 at 10:04 pm

     You mean MORE than the current government is doing? They seem to like PR spin more than doing anything significant..

     Applying your logic, the NZ Herald should shut down immediately
   • Armchair Critic 6.2

     9 October 2009 at 10:58 pm

     Like “if you ignore the problem it will go away”?
     Or like censorship?
     The former doesn’t work, the latter doesn’t work either and is authoritarian. So while I am not a fan of Winston’s I will paraphrase Voltaire on this one and say I do not agree with what Winston has to say, but I’ll defend to the death his right to say it.
7. toad 7

   9 October 2009 at 5:55 pm

   …a “tsunami” of immigrants.

   That’s sure going to go down well with anyone who has family or friends in Samoa or Tonga!

   What do we get next, Enoch Peters? A remake of the “Rivers of Blood” speech, perhaps?
8. Matthew Hooton 8

   9 October 2009 at 6:04 pm

   It is interesting you mention Winston Peters’ views on the Reserve Bank Act. You say you agree with them. I don’t. But that’s not the issue.

   What you may be interested in is why Don Brash would not deal with Winston Peters after the 2005 election when a National/Act/Maori/UF/NZF Government was theoretically possible and – given the current governing arrangements – not as fanciful as many thought back then.

   According to Dr Brash, it goes back to his first meeting with Winston Peters after Peters had been appointed Treasurer in 1996.

   Dr Brash was then the Governor of the Reserve Bank and the new National/NZF Government had made certain statements about the future management of monetary policy, based on Peters’ demands.

   Like a good official, Dr Brash had instructed his economists and policy makers to analyse what Mr Peters wanted to do with respect to the future management of monetary policy and come up with advice about how they might be implemented.

   He then raised these issues at the meeting with the new Treasurer.

   According to Dr Brash, Peters dismissed the issue saying, “don’t worry, the next election isn’t for three years” and the matters were never discussed again.

   It’s not important now what the ideas were or whether or not they had merit – its the cynicism that is so astounding. The guy had campaigned on reform to the RBA and become Treasurer, and now the Governor of the Reserve Bank wanted to start discussing how those ideas could be implemented – but he didn’t even want to discuss it because he didn’t really mean what he said. Then he set about presiding over the Douglas/Richardson/Birch framework (just as he later presided over a foreign policy he had previously opposed).

   On immigration, he didn’t do anything in the National/NZF Government to cut it back – I assume the same was true in the Labour/NZF Government nine years later.

   So, once again, all the same messages, all the same nonsense, total dishonesty, and no intention to even keep his promises if elected. Whether you agree or disagree with any particular thing he says is beside the point – he doesn’t agree with it either. Total charlatan. We shouldn’t even be talking about him, but I can’t help myself. He is the worst person ever to reach high office in New Zealand and he wins that title against considerable opposition.

   Wouldn’t it be great if both National and Labour vowed never, ever to work with him again, and that they would go to new elections if he ever held the balance of power again – although that probably would just give him publicity.

   (BTW, I guess most Standard readers would be delighted with the Brash/Peters story because it meant Dr Brash didn’t become Prime Minister and I’d agree that, despite everything, what has happened since is far better than a National/Act/Maori/UF/NZF Government, which would have been a disaster.)
   • So Bored 8.1

     9 October 2009 at 6:19 pm

     Matthew,

     How tedious you are, you bad mouthed everybody who wasnt a possible cypher for your New Right buddies, trying to get them a win for 9 years. You finally get a win, and when you get the merest hint that your regular nemisis is back and you shit yourself. You are a total joke.
   • Craig Glen Eden 8.2

     9 October 2009 at 6:19 pm

     Sounds like you are describing John Key to me Mathew, but there you go!
   • BLiP 8.3

     9 October 2009 at 6:24 pm

     WARNING: NATIONAL LTD PR SPIN MACHINE RUNNING

     Known Safety Hazards:

     1. Truth likely to be damaged

     2. Ulterior motives present

     3. Offensive odour seepage
     
   • Rex Widerstrom 8.4

     9 October 2009 at 6:30 pm

     And therein is encapsulated the true political miracle that is Winston Peters. Unlike Matthew I agree with him on the RBA and it was this — together with concerns about unbridled foreign investment and asset sales — that brought me across the divide from journalism to politics.

     Yet he manages to disgust, simultaneously, both those who vehemently oppose his ideas and those who support his (non racist) ones by failing to have the courage of his convictions.

     And yes, they were his convictions, once upon a time. I doubt having my confidence was important enough for him to keep up a charade of appearing to truly believe the things he was saying in the 90s, even in private, even if just he and I were in the room.

     Then, around 1995, he just withdrew from his like-minded advisors and threw everything behind Lhaws. At the point when NZF was 30 percent in the polls through espousing what we believed, he seemed to suddenly panic in the face of real power and responsibility, and just chuck it all in and let Lhaws craft a batch of snake oil which he’s been feeding to the public ever since.

     For instance, contrary to popular legend NZF’s policies prior to 1995 weren’t racist. While calling for a tightening of “business” immigration criteria to exclude those whose only investment in NZ was a McMansion they didn’t live in for most of the year, we were also demanding a tripling of NZ’s refugee quota.

     It wasn’t till Lhaws — whose views on Maori and race issues have been well expressed by him and need no characterisation from me — became involved that all immigrants became the target; a very different mantra from that with which we’d started.

     It’d all make an interesting psychological study. Or a new cliche — Winston Peters: the man who snatched ignominy from the jaws of popularity.
   • gobsmacked 8.5

     9 October 2009 at 6:31 pm

     National have never ruled out Winston Peters because of policy – only because of polls. When asked recently if he would refuse to work with Peters next time, Key responded that he would “cross that bridge when we come to it”. Why? What has changed? A principled answer would be “No thanks”. But of course, principle had nothing to do with it.

     Last time John Key played the odds, and won. Next time? Who knows?
   • Pascal's bookie 8.6

     9 October 2009 at 9:51 pm

     That’s a classic story hooten.

     So Brash went ahead and applied the lesson learned from Winston in 05 with all his ‘iwi/kiwi’ business and the ‘spitting in the streets’ stuff then? Or did the Nat’s mean all that stuff?
9. Tim 9

   9 October 2009 at 6:31 pm

   I detest Winston Peter’s politics – totally repulsive. However, I only deplore them to the same extent that I do ACT policies. Let’s be honest they are both as deranged as one another, yet one managed to get several seats in our parliament with half the popular vote of the other. How is that for rediculous.

   This will not effect the vote on the left. I think where it will hit will be those moral conservatives on the right that love Winston – generally grey-haried, grumpy about any form of change and what they see as (supposedly) ‘bludging foreigners’.

   The reason that I think this is not all bad from the Lefts perspective is that one thing that Winston has always been good at is holding hands over the fire. One thing that is seriously lacking at present within the house is vigorous, tough, sometimes slightly mad, raving opposition. The type of opposition to government that always gets played on the 6pm. Can you imagine what Peters would have been able to achieve with English if he was in parliament, or over the Worth scandal.

   He will never have enough clout to actually put in place any of the rediculous and totally abhorant policy that he espouses (he didn’t with Labour or National) but he is certainly a useful attack dog. Something that we are currently seriously lacking with regards to keeping NACT honest.
10. torydog 10

    9 October 2009 at 7:08 pm

    if its a choice between NZ First and that rodney guys party…….NZ First is my preference!
11. Adrian 11

    9 October 2009 at 7:14 pm

    A mere 1/2% more resurgent Peters is bad news for the incumbent boofheads, and I’ll bet he’s got that already with all the grey haired grumpies with a bad cold!
    • BLiP 11.1

      9 October 2009 at 7:21 pm

      I bet it’s more than ½ percent – add in the usual suspects, plus all the old dears unable to go to their evening classes at the local school, plus, I would say, a few thousand now relishing the Gold Card travel and the new life opportunities opened up since it started . . . its gotta be closer to 2 or 3 percent. Would almost certainly match anything the ACT buffoons can mange.
12. millsy 12

    9 October 2009 at 7:52 pm

    God you people are astounding.

    The left and the right fail to acknolwedge the elephant in the room. The fact is, that mass immigration is being used to depress wage growth in this country, and not to mention, it is locking New Zealanders out of a lot of career options, such as merchant shipping, etc. We have thrown a whole generation of New Zelanders on the scrapheap in favour of imported labour, with the sole goal of bringing down wages. Not to mention the fact that we are importing international students into our schools, who because of the fact that they pay the appropriate monies, have their needs put before NZ students.

    We complain about the rise of Maori unemployment in New Zealand, yet the Maori elite (who screw their own people more than the Nats ever had), would rather employ Filipino and Ukranian fishermen rather than train their own young people.

    Winston, despite his flaws is the only one to openly question this and many many more.

    The neo liberal right and the PC (as much as I wince when I write this) left are choking on their chardonnay at the thought of Winston coming back in 2011. But I promise you this Hooten, Standardistas, and every other blogocrat reading this, that Winston is not, well not on his own terms anyway.
13. stu 13

    9 October 2009 at 9:49 pm

    I don’t know what you’re worried about. Peters has played this tune every year since 1990, and had the same people vote for him, their a voting block like any other. He never does a thing to alter immigration or foreign investment, even when he holds the balance of power. He’ll possibly win Tauranga back and end up as a Peter Dunne for a parliament before giving up, and that will be that.
14. - excuse me please- 14

    9 October 2009 at 9:58 pm

    Screw the “The blast from the past” for a moment!

    There are more important issues!
    • BLiP 14.1

      9 October 2009 at 10:49 pm

      Like appearing on Letterman, you mean?
      • Armchair Critic 14.1.1

        9 October 2009 at 11:00 pm

        Or finding a flag for the harbour bridge for Waitangi Day?
        • - excuse me please- 14.1.1.1

          9 October 2009 at 11:18 pm

          No, none of these things, though it could be true the Letterman show is ‘now’ a priority, Letterman has just recently opened his heart, and with the ‘current ratings’ now more than ever ‘The Letterman show’ could be the new ‘Rite of passage’ for politicians, to get their 15 minutes, or their ‘publicity boost’. But old Winston is past is use-by-date, he may have had ‘charisma’ as people say, but underneath he is a little bit what’s-the-word I’ve already forgotten, I suppose I just don’t really care.
          Hence the ‘excuse me please’.
          • BLiP 14.1.1.1.1

            9 October 2009 at 11:25 pm

            Not sure about that anymore. Might be j-u-s-t enough juice left in the ole Peters gas tank to send National Ltd® down the road . . . that’s a legacy he could be proud of.
15. - excuse me please- 15

    9 October 2009 at 11:37 pm

    Well maybe, he might j-u-s-t; he would have to have the right moves huh? What do you reckon, BLiP?
    • BLiP 15.1

      9 October 2009 at 11:50 pm

      What ever moves he’s got left, they can’t be worse than these ones.
      • the sprout 15.1.1

        10 October 2009 at 7:25 am

        that’s a priceless clip BLiP
16. - excuse me please- 16

    10 October 2009 at 12:21 am

    What a boring world it would be without the ‘ridiculous’, that clip is almost as embarrassing as John Key’s shenanigans , I suppose there isn’t much difference is there?

    So I suppose if it is acceptable to act like a ‘twat’ in the role of a politician, as Key does, then there’s hope, Winston could have a chance, as anyone could, it’s not as if you need ‘serious talent’ to be a clown, huh? And if Winston has the potential, to ‘drum up publicity’ lets hope it is as funnily crude as that.

    I love idiot politicians, they amuse me.

    And, as long as they don’t last, it is even better.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS