Labour on MMP “consultation”

Written By: - Date published: 9:30 am, May 16th, 2013 - 28 comments
Categories: election 2014, Judith Collins, MMP, scoundrels - Tags: , ,

Judith Collins is trying to deflect criticism for the Nats cynical sidelining of the MMP review by claiming that there was no consensus and that she isn’t anyone’s “nanny”. But according to Labour there was no consultation:

Govt’s ‘consultation’ on MMP non-existent

The claim by John Key and Judith Collins that they tried to reach consensus with political parties on changes to MMP is completely untrue, says Labour Leader David Shearer.

“Judith Collins has claimed that she ‘consulted’ with political parties but was unable to reach consensus. There was absolutely no consultation.

“I wrote to John Key and Judith Collins last year offering to work with them on MMP reform. I even asked them to come back to me with a timetable for meetings to progress the issue.

“All I got back was a form letter asking for our views (which I’d already given them) and then deathly silence until yesterday when they announced all attempts to reach consensus were dead in the water.

“This Government is arrogantly ignoring what New Zealanders want because it’s politically inconvenient for National. There’s no way they were ever going to get rid of the coat-tails clause because they want to protect their political prop John Banks. …

John Armstrong is right. The Nats are writing off the MMP review purely as a matter of naked self-interest.

28 comments on “Labour on MMP “consultation””

  1. fambo 1

    I reckon it’s best to wait till a Labour/Green government before bringing in any changes to MMP as anything National would do would only be for self interest and most likely hinder the democratic process

    • fender 1.1

      In doing nothing National ARE acting in self interest. They are trying to protect Act/Banks and UF/Dunne, it was probably a condition of their coalition agreement, off the record of course.

  2. karol 2

    There’s a war going on within the National Party, with Joyce, Collins et al, jockeying for position.

    Collins is trying to look tough. I think probably on the MMP review, they were hoping for it to slip quietly off the table. Collins was called on it, and tried to look decisive.

    • Colonial Viper 2.1

      Progressing the MMP debate would seem like an easy win for National to look like it was taking the referendum results seriously.

      It would help them in the campaign next year: make a minor change reduce the threshold to 4% but say for the sake of stability during tough times that no other changes should be made, position it like you have heard the voice of the electorate: win win and help get the Conservatives/resurrected ACT across the line.

  3. Dv 3

    Government by the Natz for the Natz

  4. Winston Smith 4

    Lets face it if National do something/anything Labour and the Greens disagree with its the biggest attack on democracy since the last biggest attack on democracy…

    Something about the boy that cried wolf springs to mind

    • Pascal's bookie 4.1

      Yeah. Like when they said spying on NZers, cancelling local body elections, passing laws restricting what clothes people can wear, passing laws that strip people of the right to vote etc and so on were all ‘attacks on democracy’. Ridiculous.

      Dicks! Don’t they realise that if they keep that then up no one will pay any attention to them if John Key signs a painting he didn’t paint??

      • Winston Smith 4.1.1

        Pick your battles

        • freedom 4.1.1.1

          Winston, do we need to bring out Blip’s List and give you some time on the rainbow mat to work out how ridiculous that threat of impending doom is?

          you are as confused as an ant on a butcher’s block
          fascinated by the smorgasboard of apparent bounty
          you ignore the carcasses that conributed to your fare

    • freedom 4.2

      Winston, have you considered the other and equally logical conclusion? That each salvo launched by National is tasked with taking out Democracy quadrant by quadrant. So perhaps the statement itself is accurate, just decidedly uncomfortable to process without admitting that New Zealand is in real trouble. If National is elected for a third term, it will likely push this Country towards a point of no return. There is no telling how some might react. We are heading towards a very real fight where rhetoric, propaganda and the continued abdication of social responsibility are likely to be challenged by the unrestrained tensions of a Nation broken into ‘have lots’ and ‘have little’.

      Your idea that life is a cliche ridden fairy tale might deserve some reflection, but reality is what it is and I believe William of Ockham had a few things to say on that. If you are right and the world indeed is a fairy tale, perhaps we all need need reminding of how dark and dangerous fairytales are. Maybe a reading of Big Claus and Little Claus would wipe away the glib.
      http://hca.gilead.org.il/li_claus.html

  5. Winston Smith 5

    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2013/05/the_parties_on_mmp.html

    s.russell (1,286) Says:
    May 15th, 2013 at 2:30 pm
    According to that table:
    * There is a 68-53 majority for retaining the 5% threshold
    * There is a 65-56 majority for retaining the coat-tail provision
    Labour’s failure to provide a position on the other issues makes the numbers less certain, but there appears to be a majority against change on every recommendation.

    Hope his numbers are correct

    • ianmac 5.1

      Winston once National declared the status quo to protect its interests, it was all over rover. Of course it was dead in the water and no correspondence could be entered into. Of course Judith Collins could hang out for all the issues to be agreed to but that could not happen could it?

    • freedom 5.2

      no stated source, nothing, just some boxes some names and some numbers,
      this is evidence of nothing but the fact kiwiblog has access to a computer

      • Rob 5.2.1

        Can be applied to a lot of so pronounced “facts” typed around here as well.

        • tracey 5.2.1.1

          Could you supply 10 examples from this site?

        • freedom 5.2.1.2

          From what I have seen over the years, charts published on The Standard are all cited for source.

          So when you see this false representation of facts you allude to, you speak up right? or are you one of those that think these things cancel themselves out? It is after all the mantra of National in the House, day after day after day after day.. waaaaaah they did it first/as well/ worse/better/cheaper/nastier – just draw a line already and let’s move forward. I for one will never understand how people accept and defend their MPs for behaving in ways that toddlers are disciplined for.

  6. mikesh 6

    If there was ever a time for parties to put aside venal considerations and legislate simply for what was fair then this was it. They failed completely. In my view the commission’s recommendations were fair and probably reflected pretty much the views of the people who made submissions and therefore should have been adopted verbatim.

    National, I think, would have to shoulder most of the blame for this as they were the party in power and had a responsibility to ensure that the commission’s recommendations sere acted upon.

    • Draco T Bastard 6.1

      If there was ever a time for parties to put aside venal considerations and legislate simply for what was fair then this was it.

      Not going to happen from either Labour or National. As far as they’re concerned they’re there to rule us and not to implement what we want.

    • tracey 6.2

      Hmmmm, since when did national require consensus. I think they are one of the highest users of urgency and 1-2 vote majorities in the history of our parliament.

  7. ianmac 7

    Needs a special sort of arrogance to act as Collins does. Imagine her as a PM?
    Claire Trevett: ” Judith Collins offers farcical excuses as revelation delivered glibly over dismissed electoral reforms.”
    …”Despite her (Collins) protestations, it quickly became clear National was Dolly because National was the party preventing Collins getting the required votes for any legislation.”
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10883949

  8. tracey 8

    Both Joyce and Collins this week have attacked democracy from different angles, but both managed to blame the lack of democratic support on the greens and Labour.

  9. Tigger 9

    Until voters demand justice the Nats will continue this march. NZ has the govt it deserves at the moment. This latest play by Collins is nothing new. NZ is like an abused spouse, hates being hit but won’t leave the abuser.

  10. tracey 10

    ““Judith Collins has claimed that she ‘consulted’ with political parties but was unable to reach consensus. There was absolutely no consultation.

    “I wrote to John Key and Judith Collins last year offering to work with them on MMP reform. I even asked them to come back to me with a timetable for meetings to progress the issue.

    “All I got back was a form letter asking for our views (which I’d already given them) and then deathly silence until yesterday when they announced all attempts to reach consensus were dead in the water.”

    Is this a lie, like Gilmore’s lie, or a lie by a Minister which isn’t really a lie because it depends on the definition of “consulted”. I just wondered because you know, they would have to resign, Collins and Key if they lied or behaved badly (but not illegally) like Gilmore.

  11. ghostrider888 11

    “1 seat threshold- a mistake” -Royal Commission

    • ghostwhowalksnz 11.1

      Watch them change it quick smart if ACT is no longer in parliament and its Hone Harawira who is the one who brings in an extra Mp !

      Then of course it will be ‘part of the absurdity’ that is MMP and we should throw the whole system out and go back to FFP

  12. kiwicommie 12

    National only did the referendum because it wanted to test the waters. It wanted to turn the country back to FPTP, but since most supported MMP they realized it would erode them politically so they ignored it.

    • Draco T Bastard 12.1

      Yep, that’s exactly what they’ve done. Thing is, they promised a review if the people kept MMP which pretty much means that they promised to make changes and now they’re not. People will be noticing this and will be realising that National really did want to take us back to a less democratic form of government.

    • Tracey 12.2

      Nah they did it when they arrogantly thought they could rule alone…

Links to post

Recent Comments

Recent Posts