Labour leadership – have your say!

70 comments on “Labour leadership – have your say! ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Colonial Viper 1

   12 December 2011 at 8:47 am

   DONE!
2. Hilary 2

   12 December 2011 at 8:58 am

   Do what I want or else! Sounds like a bunch of toddlers. (Or the right).
   What about saying that this current process shows that the party that is almost 100 years old is still full of life, is still evolving, has diverse potential leaders (and membership) and is not afraid of a healthy contest of ideas and styles?
   • IrishBill 2.1

     12 December 2011 at 9:18 am

     I think it’s valid for members to lobby their representatives to try to have their views represented. Don’t you?
     • Shane Gallagher 2.1.1

       12 December 2011 at 9:47 am

       Actually – you could always go for this radical idea called “democracy”? It is where the members of your party have a thing called a “vote” and they use this to elect their leader. Its all the rage these days I hear… oligarchy is just so old hat.
       • IrishBill 2.1.1.1

         12 December 2011 at 10:01 am

         I like the idea of proper democracy but unless the constitution is changed in the next 24 hours lobbying is the best members can do.
   • dancerwaitakere 2.2

     12 December 2011 at 5:30 pm

     Labour MPs must pay attention to their Members, they should be made to justify why those who vote against are prepared to defy the wishes of the membership – We back Cunliffe and Mahuta.

     We dont have the ability to vote this election, but MPs should remember that they need members.

     When we are the ones who stop putting up signs, delivering pamphlets, or supporting their confirmation as candidates- it will be remembered when they show distain for what the en masse party wants.
     • lprent 2.2.1

       12 December 2011 at 5:37 pm

       The problem is that it isn’t a en masse party and hasn’t been since the 80’s. These days it is a pitiful remainder of its former glories. What it is however is reasonably large number of members who go and do what is required to keep the party organisation running. We actually usually get more non-members helping out on election day than members for instance because people haul in family members, friends, and even just people who want to go to the party.

       But without the members organizing, it doesn’t work.
       • dancerwaitakere 2.2.1.1

         12 December 2011 at 5:55 pm

         Sorry I should have worded that more clearly, I was intending to say that we need to return to being an en masse party. The only way to do that is to let the members speak and then value their contribution.

         Cunliffe is the only candidate to openly say that members SHOULD have a vote on the leadership and next time this will happen.
     • Hami Shearlie 2.2.2

       12 December 2011 at 8:05 pm

       My cousin and her husband worked tirelessly for 3 labour mps in 3 separate electorates. I would have thought that this type of voluntary slog over many, many months should entitle them to a say over who should be Labour’s leader! The sooner the party members are entitled to choose the leader(maybe alongside the mps) the better – it’s their party. In reality the mps’ are their employees, supposed to be there to represent the party members’ views! If Shearer is leader, I fear mass defections to other parties and many will simply leave for good. Who will deliver their leaflets, put up their signs then?
3. johnm 3

   12 December 2011 at 9:11 am

   I live in Ohariu, I could get an interview with Dunne and express my disgust at asset sales.

   I hope Cunliffe becomes the new Labour leader. I’m prejudiced but my feeling about Shearer is he’s a corporate do gooder opportunist electing him could be the end of Labour as a party seeking to give a hand up to the have nots, despite the fact Shearer was helping in the organised aid area.
4. Chris Oden 4

   12 December 2011 at 9:16 am

   I like the look of Shearer but he does come across as a bit diffident and not quite sure of himself.But he can learn with some mentoring,whereas Cunliffe is to much the other way and seems more of a Cunliffe man than a Labour man.He doesn’t seem to mind putting a bit of dirt around to further his aims.He could be divisive and also could be very polarising in the long term.
   Shearer for me as long as its not all about his”back story”and he allows himself to be mentored into being the very good leader he can be.
   • Craig Glen Eden 4.1

     12 December 2011 at 10:06 am

     We have not got time for Shearer to learn to stop putting his foot in it. Every time he speaks in he goes and thats without having his opponent try and trick him. Shearer is not a leader he is an administrator, maybe a good one but I wouldn’t follow him to the nearest Fish and Chip shop.

     This anti Cunliffe thing is straight out jealousy on behalf of a few very small minded Labour Mps.

     Cunliffe and Mahuta are inclusive and clearly have a vision and a plan for the future of the party.

     Cunliffes decision to have Mahuta is a real good one she will keep his feet firmly on the ground as will his wife (Karen) and his New Lynn LEC.

     Labour needs progressive leadership not a bumbling administrator.
     • Colonial Viper 4.1.1

       12 December 2011 at 6:14 pm

       Labour needs progressive leadership not an able administrator.

       That “bumbling” remark was a bit unfair, but you can change it to the above and it still doesn’t work. David Cunliffe all the way.
     • Hami Shearlie 4.1.2

       12 December 2011 at 8:07 pm

       Agreed once again Craig G.E!
5. Pete George 5

   12 December 2011 at 10:07 am

   I agree that party members lobbying their MP is the best they can do for now so should exercise that right if they feel strongly enough to. But…

   Electing the leader that party members support would be a bloody good start.

   Support will be split, so some will be disappointed. They should promote their preferred candidate, but regardless of the result then need to support their new leader.

   And then try and get a more democratic selection process.
6. Anne 6

   12 December 2011 at 10:28 am

   He doesn’t seem to mind putting a bit of dirt around to further his aims.He could be divisive and also could be very polarising in the long term.

   You’re not well informed Chris Oden. It’s not Cunliffe who is putting the dirt around, it’s his caucus detractors. I refer to some in the caucus who are jealous of his exceptional abilities and fear they will lose their power and influence under his leadership guidance.

   Btw Pete Goerge, try to stop stating the obvious all the time. We don’t need you to tell us things many of us have known since you were probably only knee high to a grasshopper.
   • Hami Shearlie 6.1

     12 December 2011 at 8:14 pm

     Selfish mps who have been there forever, will, for their own future prospects, cost Labour the chance to be in government in 2014. They want Shearer because they can mould him and bend him to their will – I shudder to think of him asking questions in Parliament. Cunliffe outshines them, and they just can’t stand it! Who even knows what Shearer really believes in or stands for? I’m getting sick of hearing about his “backstory”! It’s now we have to worry about, and he’s not looking good on the media front! If Cunliffe doesn’t get the leadership I wouldn’t blame him if he decided to leave them all to it, and left Parliament altogether!!
7. js 7

   12 December 2011 at 10:35 am

   For once I agree with Pete George!

   I agree that such a vote should be extended to all party members, and I think party policy man Jordan Carter has expressed that. But that is a constitutional change that needs to be promoted by active members through the annual conference.

   In the meantime lobbying your local or nearby Labour MP is fine. But about half the members probably won’t be happy with the result. Do they resign, undermine the new leader (with the support of any media outlets) or do the mature thing and just get on with rebuilding the party and its support?
   • Colonial Viper 7.1

     12 December 2011 at 6:16 pm

     Do they resign, undermine the new leader (with the support of any media outlets) or do the mature thing and just get on with rebuilding the party and its support?

     lprent has already suggested what he thinks might happen and I tend to agree. Labour cannot run without its small and committed core of activists.
8. Jum 8

   12 December 2011 at 10:50 am

   Why not co-leaders (and co-deputies)? If both have different strengths, e.g. in Parliamentary question time to catch out weasel Key in his lies and on the visits around New Zealand seeing people and getting their thoughts – both of which require a different strength – then why not two people?

   Two people out there gunning for Key in order to destroy his plans to sell off New Zealand and New Zealanders. Two people out there doubling the electoral coverage and doubling the support for Labour MPs.

   Greens do it. Norman and Turei have different strengths and appeal to different people just as Cunliffe and Shearer do – we cannot afford to lose either strength. That is shown by the neck and neck polling. We need both men and we need Mahuta and Robertson to give them the support they need to do the job.

   We know Labour can think imaginatively on behalf of our future and recognise NAct’s planned dismantling of our country’s sovereignty, by making political promises such as stopping State Owned Enterprise sell offs. Don’t let New Zealand and New Zealanders down on this simple solution to what isn’t a problem. We need both, equally, and their supporting deputies.
   • salsy 8.1

     12 December 2011 at 12:26 pm

     Yes, exactly
   • Spratwax 8.2

     12 December 2011 at 1:12 pm

     I hate the co-leader option-its so ‘6 o’clock news’, male/female, happy familes, PC bullshit! Lets just stick with leader and deputy. I feel Shearer has been put up by the party chronies wanting to keep their rank/power far beyond their use-by date. I think he would push Labour uncomfortably close to the centre, with far less of a distinct ideological seperation that Cunliffe would demand if he were leader. Don’t fall for the right wing campaign via the media to blacken Cunliffe and endorse Shearer. Even Matt McCarten fell for it early on, endorsing Shearer, but his weekend Granny piece has a different tone, saying that Cunliffe is better qualified to lead now.

     If we want to win in 2014 it must be Cunliffe. If its Shearer then its 6 more years of pain.
     • Hami Shearlie 8.2.1

       12 December 2011 at 8:16 pm

       True indeed Spratty!
9. js 9

   12 December 2011 at 11:02 am

   Personally I like the Occupy movement co-operative attitude that no one and everyone is a leader.
10. Damos 10

    12 December 2011 at 11:24 am

    I like the co-leader option too, bring both sides of your party together. Interestingly though, the democratic process is a strange one and it seems to me that Camp Cunliffe is keen for that, largely I think because they know if it came to a Membership vote, Cunliffe would have won already. 

    The thing that really interests me about this process is that it seems in the media that Mr Shearer has numbers, given where the Members are, can those MPs backing him really vote against the will of their members? I know for one, our MPs don’t if they can’t win the debate. That’s why the membership is so active, supportive and resoundingly behind our leaders. If, as reported, Mr Shearer is well ahead, would that not have been reflected through the support of the members? 

    As I’ve said before, Cunliffe and Mahuta presented really well in Wellington (where I had to join the party to get in! – Is that a fund raiser?).  The suprise for me was Mahuta and just how connected she is and I think people are over-looking the benifit she is to the leadership team being offered.

    Both Robertson and Shearer seem like good people, but two things concern me and one is that Mr Shearer is backed by the same crowd who caused Labour to be disengaged from its base and two neither seem ready yet.  Robertson of the two seems more competent an option than his running mate.  I don’t understand how there is such a close race here.

    The personality politics at play here don’t ring true to the sentiment of an open process where members were asked for their views.  If that were so, surely Cunliffe and Mahuta would already have the required number of votes.

    If MPs are working for the poor, if they’re really about reconnecting with Maori and PI and women, it seems a simple thing to me.  If they’re not, it seems to me they will back Shearer and the “old guard” (whatever that means really), you need to seek some accountability from them about their choice.  Good luck to all four candidates though because it seems to me this process has already energised your party.  
    • lprent 10.1

      12 December 2011 at 12:28 pm

      The suprise for me was Mahuta and just how connected she is and I think people are over-looking the benifit she is to the leadership team being offered.

      It was for me as well. In Auckland, the rest were pretty predictable from what I knew about them before the leadership debate started.

      But I was pleasantly surprised with the performance of Mahuta – especially when it came to the questions from the floor. I was also impressed when I looked back on the results in her electorate seat.

      …because it seems to me this process has already energised your party…

      It has helped. But the cynic in me says that I saw much the same things being done after several losses across many elections 81, 90, 93, 96, and especially 08. The only one that seemed to have resulted in tangible positive changes at the party level was the one in 81 and 96 (when the party vote emphasis went in). 1990 had a number of tangible changes – few were positive.

      The organisational buzz from 08 for changes in the party resulted in pretty much nothing apart from a central canvassing database (which was mostly used ineffectively this election) and a few individual MP’s repairing their electorate organisations.
      • Damos 10.1.1

        12 December 2011 at 12:57 pm

        Yeah, agree on Mahuta (obviously). I think there is a serious risk of looking over her talent.  She had that ability to speak to people I hadn’t seen in a while.  She’s a Maori MP and coming from a white middle-class metropolitan family, I was surprised at what made me check the boxes with her.  

        On the energy thing, it was palpable (sp and too lazy to check, sorry). If they can do that in one meeting, what could they do in three years.  I don’t know, the more I read, the more I hear from Labour and Green voters the more I think Labour is at risk of stuffing this up.

        Does the Labour Party require it’s MPs to tell it’s electorate people who they voted for? I’m seeing a lot of comments about people wanting to know. I mean, that seems fair enough given the MPs decided to let the process be public and asked for Members (and Newbies!) to be involved in the process, they asked for feedback and they’re getting it.  Surely it’s about that rather than just what they personally think? Do you know much about that?  
        • Colonial Viper 10.1.1.1

          12 December 2011 at 7:34 pm

          Does the Labour Party require it’s MPs to tell it’s electorate people who they voted for?

          Nope. And yes, its a problem.
          • The Voice of Reason 10.1.1.1.1

            12 December 2011 at 7:51 pm

            Do you have a problem with secret ballots, CV?
            • dancerwaitakere 10.1.1.1.1.1

              12 December 2011 at 7:59 pm

              The problem is that these MPs are voting on behalf of the members in their electorates.
11. Cin77 11

    12 December 2011 at 12:06 pm

    If I could vote, I’d vote for Cunliffe. He seems much more articulated than Shearer. I like his choice of deputy as well.
12. js 12

    12 December 2011 at 12:07 pm

    Interesting comments here from Keith Ng on Public Address http://publicaddress.net/onpoint/dear-labour-caucus/
    which might explain why the strong public performer is not always the best team leader. Perceptions of strong leadership vary depending on where you are situated.
    • Anthony 12.1

      12 December 2011 at 12:46 pm

      That seems like some out of character shit spinning from Keith and I normally expect better reading his posts.
      • Craig Glen Eden 12.1.1

        12 December 2011 at 2:28 pm

        Yup total “shit spinning” he assumes a lot with knowing very little. More of the same from an anti Cunliffe source. Goff stuffed up with the numbers Keith it had nothing to do with Cunliffe, people make mistakes and that mistakes was Phil’s. Trying to run the line that Goff was undermined by Cunliffe is untrue and pathetic, is that the best you have got? Other than that one mistake Phil did a pretty good job during the campaign imho.

        New Lynn Party supporters waited for Cunliffe the night of the election he had not pre- arranged it nor requested such a reception.Those same people went inside and gave Goff the same kind of support inside just as we did when Helen stood down three years earlier we were their to show our support for Labour, when the chips are down thats what New Lynn LEC does. Lots of people want to be their when we win but you don’t see them when we loose!
        Why Keith? Because unlike your petty factional sniping they support Labour and can see beyond factions in the Party and they put on a brave face for the public and cameras.

        Cunliffe and Shearer have both run clean campaigns to their credit and I would expect nothing different from either.
        • daveo 12.1.1.1

          12 December 2011 at 2:41 pm

          Cunliffe and Shearer have both run clean campaigns to their credit and I would expect nothing different from either.

          Trevor has had proxies working hard to undermine Cunliffe both in the media and on the internet.

          It’s no secret that the resources of the labour leaders office are being put behind Shearer. That’s why the flyer of him distributed at the party meetings looks so much like all of labour’s other design work.

          Similarly the media team has been looking after Shearer’s interests in the gallery and a variety of people on the labour leaders office payroll have been engaged in anti-Cunliffe commentary. I believe Keith is still subcontracted by them for policy work. I can’t say I blame them for this. Like the old guard front bench, these people are just defending their personal interests.
          • mickysavage 12.1.1.1.1

            12 December 2011 at 4:10 pm

            I have heard these comments too and I cannot say how disappointing I am with them. 
             
            If Labour is going to get anywhere it has to be way more than a vehicle to provide some with lifestyles.  It has to be an all embracing open party that has the support of activists.  MPs need to come from the communities, not parachuted in from Head Office.
             
            If Keith Ng is subcontracted then he should not be making comments.  And if Pagani is going for the top job then the same with him.
            • the sprout 12.1.1.1.1.1

              12 December 2011 at 4:58 pm

              I usually rank Keith Ng very highly but this time he was talking out of a hole in his arse. I assumed it was the Ardern/Brown Grey Lynn Luvvies connection
              • lprent …

                12 December 2011 at 5:45 pm

                Hey I live in Grey Lynn (in fact I suspect in my more suspect Gilmore moments I often wonder if they named the place after me through some kind of timewarp 🙂 ) Its gentrified waffler reputation is vastly over-rated.

                But getting back to the reality of lack of realities, I did read his post with a certain amount of mirth. He definitely got it wrong this time – in fact pretty much reversed.
            • dancerwaitakere 12.1.1.1.1.2

              12 December 2011 at 5:40 pm

              The party needs to be one in touch with its membership base once again.

              Lets not forget where the Labour Party comes from and who we represent. The insder interests of the Goff/Shearer camp must be put aside, and MP’s need to vote knowing that the Members have spoken loud and clear.

              Cunliffe and Nanaia are ready to lead.
          • Colonial Viper 12.1.1.1.2

            12 December 2011 at 7:31 pm

            That’s why the flyer of him distributed at the party meetings looks so much like all of labour’s other design work.

            Ah, that explains why I had the vague inclination to start putting them into neighbourhood letterboxes. Makes sense now.
            • dancerwaitakere 12.1.1.1.2.1

              12 December 2011 at 8:00 pm

              They continue to present Shearer in the same way they did with Goff.

              Guess what?! It didnt work!!!!!!!
13. giovani 13

    12 December 2011 at 12:38 pm

    Cunliffe should be the leader, maybe Shearer could be deputy.
14. Bored 14

    12 December 2011 at 1:02 pm

    These two guys need to get together and be closer than close. I don’t care if Cunliffe or Shearer is leader, they both need to be either numbers one or two.

    Forget Mahuta or Robertson, their time will come if they are good enough. We need a united team with the strongest at the front. Cunliffe needs to be the “bag” man exposing Shonkers on the economy, Shearer needs to savage the social impacts.

    There is still time for the two of them to sort it out and give the message of unity, this should not have to go to a divisive vote.
    • Anthony 14.1

      12 December 2011 at 1:19 pm

      Yep I’m pro Cunliffe but I’m pretty sure Shearer will win the vote, how he responds to that will be the important part…
    • dancerwaitakere 14.2

      12 December 2011 at 5:42 pm

      And if Shearer does win, the rest of us will sit anxious waiting to see how many times he puts his foot in his mouth every interview. Just like we have done for the last three years.
      • Hami Shearlie 14.2.1

        12 December 2011 at 8:24 pm

        Phil Goff was way better than Shearer with regards to the media and Labour still lost. Media persona is everything to a party leader. Case in point – John Key! Cunliffe can do media effortlessly. Shearer is woeful. And in parliament Cunliffe could really savage English and Key – Shearer will be eaten alive!
15. Draco T Bastard 15

    12 December 2011 at 1:31 pm

    Come Wednesday you also need to ask them who they voted for and hold them to account for their decision.

    And what’s that going to prove? All the rep has to say is that they went with the most supported. Without an open and verified voting system nothing can be proved.
16. G Dub 16

    12 December 2011 at 2:43 pm

    I went to the Sunday meeting with an open mind.

    I liked David Shearer and after listening to him I think he has some good ideas about the change required within the party. His inexperience showed and if he wins, he is going to have to quickly to grow into the leader’s role.
    However David Cunlife has already had that time and it really shows. He is pumped and ready to go. He is articulate, policy driven and understands the party. He knows how to reach his audience and he really impressed me in his commitment to give party members a vote in the next leadership race. Long overdue in my view!

    Nanaia was streaks ahead of Grant Robertson. This doesn’t surprise me because she is an experienced politician who has been overlooked for years. I am glad she is finally getting recognised. She deserves to be the Deputy, no matter who is the leader. Not just because she is woman and Maori but because she is articulate, determined, and can make a real difference in delivering votes back into the Labour fold.
    As for Grant, He may be a good back room strategist but I cant see him in a leadership role .
17. Sunny 17

    12 December 2011 at 2:50 pm

    Shearer is too easily associated with Halliburton ( pretty much all reconstruction in Iraq) and too easily associated with Helen Clark. Some people loathe her and loathe the idea that she may be able to ‘meddle in NZ politics’ through someone like David Shearer ( her old electorate, ‘parachuted in’, annointed by her sucessor, himself annointed as leader as she departed) And while he may have stared down an African warlord and avoided being shot…the NZ media will make such a meal of this sort of thing he’ll want to shoot himself.
18. AnnaLiviaPlurabella 18

    12 December 2011 at 3:14 pm

    Hey Sunny, Take it easy, you are drawing a very long bow there!

    Shearers’s work was genuinely peace making. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with being associated with Helen Clark: she was elected three times into the role of PM by the people of NZ. Keep a sense of perspective.

    We all have to work together to win the next election and Shearer will be a part of that hopfully, though in a Cunliffe lead party.

    Only a parliamentary apprentceship forges one into being material for a leadership role: Cunliff has done his apprenciceship and is a master craftsman. Shearer is not out of his time yet.
    • Redbaron77 18.1

      12 December 2011 at 7:09 pm

      Agreed on that one. I had a number of reservations about Team Cunliffe after yesterday’s Auckland meeting but after a night’s sleep and time to think about things during the day my “vote” has swung back to DC. However I would like to see Grant Robertson and Shane Jones on the DC front bench. After a torrid three years ending in an “ass-kicking” two weeks ago, we and more importantly New Zealand cannot afford for Labour to run any more political experiments with leadership.
19. Peter 19

    12 December 2011 at 3:54 pm

    The real worry here is what might happen if the Shearer/Robertson combo falls over halfway through the term, i.e. if the polls don’t pick up and if they are perceived as not making a dent on National, what happens then?

    Labour can simply not afford more leadership instability. The team you pick in Caucus tomorrow has to last the distance, to 2014 and then beyond, hopefully into government.
    • js 19.1

      12 December 2011 at 4:44 pm

      Ditto, what if the Cunliffe/Mahuta duo didn’t make a dent in the polls?
      • Colonial Viper 19.1.1

        12 December 2011 at 7:09 pm

        You perservere with a strong, dedicated and experienced leadership team, one unlikely to make silly gaffes. Which Cunliffe and Mahuta represents.
    • the sprout 19.2

      12 December 2011 at 5:00 pm

      i suspect that it’s intended to fall over, hence the enthusiasm of the newer careerists voting for the ticket. that’s why it’s such a shitty jack-up
      • dancerwaitakere 19.2.1

        12 December 2011 at 6:01 pm

        Yes, Parker stood aside too easily for this to be nothing less than fishy.
20. AnnaLiviaPlurabella 20

    12 December 2011 at 4:09 pm

    Hi Peter, I agree with you.

    Each MPs needs to be opernly frank with their members on how they voted. That way we will get over any divisions quickly.

    If Shearer gets in and falls on his face we need to be strong to recover. If there are divisions between activists and MPs then we will be totally screwed e.g. Auckland Central.

    Key could well call a SNAP ELECTION in order to get an absolute majority. That way he won’t need the Maori party for confidence and supply. He does not have the numbers for Asset Sales.
21. Craig Glen Eden 21

    12 December 2011 at 4:39 pm

    Labour has to be ready for National to not go the full term and seriously that is a possibility.
    Thats why it has to be Cunliffe and Mahuta we havent got 3 years for media training for Shearer. We need to hit the ground running, how the hell is Shearer going to do that honestly.

    Shearer is a nice guy but he is an administrator he is not a leader or PM material.Their is no way he could lead attacks in the house he hasnt lead any so far in 2.5 years now we are suppose to go oh yeah lets get in behind Shearer cos he can beat Key really? This from the same people who thought Phil was the man for the job. Key is not even good, but Labour sad to say have been worse.

    We need big changes not more of the same with a different face.
22. Anne 22

    12 December 2011 at 5:01 pm

    if the polls don’t pick up and if they are perceived as not making a dent on National, what happens then?

    If Shearer gets the leadership I think you will find the polls will pick up. – more so than if Cunliffe gets the job – and the Shearer supporters will say “see… he was the right choice after all.” But after about a year (possibly sooner) they will start to decline again because it will be obvious by then Shearer lacks political experience and can’t better Key in the House. When it happens, you can bet your bottom dollar the Nats will have a strategy in place to take full advantage of it.
    • lprent 22.1

      12 December 2011 at 5:30 pm

      That is my reading of the probable outcomes as well. It is what any evil minded cynic would do.

      The other side of that is that by doing it now, then we can get roll the unpopular leader effect before the election. Someone else with too little experience right now tries for it and hopes that the ‘new’ effect last through the election.

      Been through all of this factional calculation before. It is somewhat tiresome. Doesn’t seem to work nearly as well here as it does in aussie where they usually draw their inspiration from.
    • oftenpuzzled 22.2

      12 December 2011 at 7:42 pm

      Almost anyone could better Key in the House he actually makes little impact, its the smile wave stuff outside that has made him popular and that is beginning to loose some shine. We shouldn’t be setting Key up as the boggie man he is weak and it will show soon enough. Caucus will choose who they think best for both positions they could even choose Cunliffe/Robertson, it is two separate votes, and really Cunliffe should not be running on a ‘ticket’ maybe that suggests something about Cunliffe, wants it all his waydoes that augur well. Anyway whatever the outcome we must all get in behind & support them.
    • deuto 22.3

      12 December 2011 at 10:05 pm

      Exactly, Anne. i for one do not believe that Key will stay the course until 2014 – he obviously did not enjoy the 2011 election process and my instincts are and have been that he will bail probably mid next year. Just wish it was now. Unless I am wrong the last time he was in the House per se, was the afternoon of his disgracefull throat cutting behaviour and that is what he should be remembered for.
23. G Dub 23

    12 December 2011 at 5:09 pm

    the sprout, I agree with your suspicion that the Shearer/Robertson ticket is intended to fall over,  to allow for some other newbies to step in, but surely they don’t think Robertson  could lead us into an election?!

    and yes CGE,  Shearer is not an attack dog, he doesnt have that “go for the jugular instinct”  that is necessary for good debate in the house.    He is a nice guy, I think that is his appeal,   but I can’t   that standing him in good stead in the parliament, or in the 30 second sound bites which is all we will get on the nightly news.
24. Fieldwest 24

    12 December 2011 at 5:28 pm

    For Shear, being the leader of Labour party (if this happened) would be a bruising experience… and it’ll be more interesting to see who will end up with wiping the bottom?
25. Santi 25

    12 December 2011 at 6:39 pm

    Shearer is the man!
    • dancerwaitakere 25.1

      12 December 2011 at 8:01 pm

      Cunliffe is the leader.
      • Hami Shearlie 25.1.1

        12 December 2011 at 8:30 pm

        He is indeed! Why can’t the mps see it?
26. neoleftie 26

    12 December 2011 at 9:29 pm

    I see a double bind, i see smoke mirrors and an agenda…as goff was the fall guy for 2011 i think shearer just might be the next fill in until 2017 and the next electoral cycle.
    While most commentators i.e labourites seek renewal, reconnection, inclusion and modern progressive thinking on the oraganisational structure of the party we as the body have little power and little say to actaully get the required change need to recapture the lost electroral ground.
    We need a leadership team, we need party unity and we need a modernised party that is focused on winning in 2014 cause people are suffering.
    If shearer wins the battle for leadership but fails to win the war look to Robertson making his power play coinciding with the elctroral cycle of 2017…just right for the transition from H1 to H3.
    I was there in 2011 and shook shearers hand, heard our man shearer speak, i went with an open mind but i heard, saw and observed cunliffe as well.

    Give me mahuta / cunliffe team and long overdue modern overhaul of the party organisation that re-ignites the membership, reconnects to the lost labour supports and identifiers. Do away with the elite cliques and power grouping and FFS provide some focus and direction on what matters –
    WE NEED TO RECONNECT TO THE ELECTORATE NOW…we cannot wait for the tories to splutter and fall outa power in 2017.
    • Colonial Viper 26.1

      12 December 2011 at 9:46 pm

      Someone once said to me “Watch out for those who would prefer to be in control of a losing Labour, rather than be without control of a winning Labour.”
27. Kairos 27

    13 December 2011 at 5:49 am

    Labour MPs have a fearful responsibility today.
    The Party membership has made its preference known. It is for a Cunliffe/Mahuta leadership.
    Caucus members ignore the will of the Party at their peril. You cannot open the door to a more democratic process for the leadership choice then slam it shut again. The Party foot will remain firmly in the door.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS