Jim Anderton on organisation

Written By: - Date published: 8:24 pm, September 11th, 2009 - 20 comments
Categories: labour - Tags:

The most interesting feature of the Labour conference so far has been from Jim Anderton. It looks like the Progressives are now able to have dual membership with Labour.

However he also talking about better organisation of the party towards campaign planning. Some of his ideas are a bit dated (well at least to me). However his general techniques are the ones that I’ve personally been after for a long time. They are largely the same ones we have been using in Mt Albert for a long time.

This is going to be interesting. What is just as interesting in the short term will be what the interested expression that Chris Trotter  means

20 comments on “Jim Anderton on organisation ”

  1. burt 1

    This just confirms that Jim is doing the same thing as Bill English – structuring his affairs only so that he can gouge more from the trough. Separate party – yeah right.

    • gargoyle 1.1

      Burt this is quite true and the very same charge could be levelled at Dunne – there surely must be some way to stop the never ending troughing that these parliamentarians seem to be addicted to.

      • burt 1.1.1

        Dunne is a windsock so in that regard he just sells himself to the highest bidder but Jolly Jim always aligns with Labour. So I disagree that Dunne is doing the same as Jolly Jim, but that’s not to say I have a lot of respect for Dunne or wish to defend his actions in anyway.

  2. jabba 2

    oh please .. Jim is a waste of time. Please tell me in under 10,000 words what value he is to the process.
    You have to explain why you hold onto this bloke but treat the Greens like leapers .. or at least Helen did for 2 elections.

  3. Scott 3

    So how much does dual membership increase the ranks of Labour by? A single digit amount I’d guess.

    Anderton needs to remove the “s” from “Progressives”. False advertising?

  4. jabba 4

    scott .. did you know that jim has a deputy?

    • Scott 4.1

      Really? What a soul destroying role that must be. What does he do?

      Is he the guy that organises the phone booth for their annual conference?

  5. jabba 5

    gee scott .. you know the guy.
    I think it’s Matt Robson and yes, soul destroying would be a good description. I’m not sure but he may have helped Labour in the Mt A bye election. He may have been the difference between wining and losing.
    bye yourself a beer on me.

  6. jabba 6

    good one.
    Jim told his supporters they could pull the pin and join/rejoin the Labour party .. what is that all about?

  7. I’d appreciate anyone who wants to address Labour’s terrible election ads,
    I haven’t seen as decent on in six years.

    The mud sling last year and 2004 was only topped by the baby dangling by the Labour red tape.

  8. Noko 8

    Jim’s drug policies are based on a bad personal experience, and he wants to impose these laws which have been shown time after time to hurt and not help people because he feels (in lieu of any actual evidence) that the ongoing prohibition will help anyone.

    A fool.

  9. burt 9

    OK, so reading between the lines; what Jim’s really saying is that he’s not standing in 2011.

    He’s giving his party faithful a lifeline, easily done because all he really has ever been is Labour with different external branding, and he’s given a clear signal that he’s out of here after this final snuffle in the through.

  10. A. Akbar 10

    What has he ever stood for that’s been different from what the labour party has stood for? And why wasn’t he absorbed into the labour party as a senior MP years ago?

    Captcha:proved, lol

    • gargoyle 10.1

      Because as the leader of a party he can gorge at the taxpayer teat to a greater degree.

    • burt 10.2

      100,000 reasons to have separate external branding.

    • Draco T Bastard 10.3

      He was a senior MP in the Labour party years ago. He left because of Roger Douglas and his reforms that were being pushed through in the 1980s.

      BTW, a party needs to have minimum of 500 financial members.

  11. George D 11

    If he’s in Labour, he should dissolve his party.

    One has to wonder why Labour is doing this, what benefit, apart from warm fuzzies, it gives them. It looks like a rort, and if the right picks up on it it will just be another stick for them to accuse Labour of cheating and further tarnish Labour’s reputation.

  12. mike 12

    You know Labour are buggered when they turn to Jurassic Jim for inspiration.
    Aren’t labour trying to show a fresh approach and leave the past behind them?

    • burt 12.1

      mike

      Goff will need to check with Helen to see if they are really trying to leave the past behind – stand by txtda inbound, something about how to suck eggs…

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.