Labour reshuffle

Written By: - Date published: 11:13 am, December 16th, 2016 - 96 comments
Categories: labour - Tags:

Andrew Little has undertaken a minor reshuffle of the Labour caucus, here’s the RNZ summary:

Labour reshuffles caucus team

David Parker becomes Labour’s foreign affairs spokesperson, taking over from departing MP David Shearer, and new arrival Michael Wood gets the consumer affairs role in Labour’s caucus reshuffle.
…
The party has also created ‘New Economy’ portfolio which will be held by Mr Little and focuses on the future wealth of the economy through innovation and productivity.

An excellent development.

…Chris Hipkins adds all the associate delegations of tertiary education held by Mr Cunliffe to his overall Education duties. He will be stepping down from his Senior Whip role. Kris Faafoi will be nominated as his replacement and would also keep the Shadow Leader of the House role.

Mr Parker takes over foreign affairs from Mr Shearer. Stuart Nash gains state-owned enterprises and will also be the new spokesperson for Innovation and science, and research and development.

Iain Lees-Galloway will be the new defence spokesperson. Dr Megan Woods adds state services to her duties while Clare Curran takes over ICT and moves into the Shadow Cabinet.

Parker is a great pick for foreign affairs.

96 comments on “Labour reshuffle ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Muttonbird 1
    16 December 2016 at 11:16 am

    A lot of our right wing crowd claimed Michael Wood would sink without trace on the back bench after his stunning victory in Mt Roskill.

    Whoops, he’s now in cabinet!

    Well done Michael.

    • alwyn 1.1
      16 December 2016 at 11:44 am

      “Whoops, he’s now in cabinet!”.

      Amazing. I really didn’t think anyone could be so foolish as to not know what the Cabinet is.
      Do you really not understand that there are no members of the Opposition who are in the Cabinet?
      And do you also realise that Wood ranks dead last in the Labour MP rankings? He’s even behind Clayton Cosgrove and Adrian Rurawhe

      • Muttonbird 1.1.1
        16 December 2016 at 11:52 am

        Caucus, then.

        I have dyslexia. That seems to be a defence used by right wing trolls on this site.

        • ropata 1.1.1.1
          16 December 2016 at 12:04 pm

          Someone please put alwyn back in the troll cabinet cupboard closet

        • esoteric pineapples 1.1.1.2
          16 December 2016 at 12:40 pm

          Interestingly, dyslexia isn’t recognised as a specific condition by the medical fraternity. It has become a bag into which all less common forms of cognitive perception are thrown. The problem is that everyone perceives in slightly different ways to each other but for practical reasons a norm is established which caters to the largest group, especially for education. The term dyslexia does help people who have felt they have trouble learning to feel that they are not simply stupid which is probably how they felt, especially at school. Helping people with “dyslexia” towards self-directed learning may be a way to overcome this issue.

          However, as to Muttonbird’s comment, yes, people do seen to use it as an excuse sometimes.

          [The policy states that it’s not ok to use language or attacks that exclude people. Too much of this discussion in both threads falls in the Abelism category. It’s not ok to deny that someone has a disability when they do, and doing so is a political act, esp when you have no way of knowing, that impacts negatively on people with disabilities. Please stop. – weka]

        • alwyn 1.1.1.3
          16 December 2016 at 12:46 pm

          Well yes he is certainly in the Caucus. Getting elected to Parliament was going to get into some caucus or other. He will still be vanishing onto a seat way, way back in the Labour Party ranks. Probably in the back row at the left hand end.

          I can’t imagine he will get to keep Goff’s old seat when Parliament reopens again next year.

        • Red 1.1.1.4
          16 December 2016 at 1:59 pm

          I just have fat thumbs, type like a 5 year old and press send far to quickly, relying on auto check. Saying that I do find it amusing you can proof read something to the cows come home ant not spot anything and immediately after you send you spot an error. As if the simple fact of relaxing re boots your brain

          • b waghorn 1.1.1.4.1
            16 December 2016 at 3:24 pm

            since when has your brain ever rebooted, if it did there might be hope for you.

            • Red 1.1.1.4.1.1
              16 December 2016 at 3:46 pm

              In my case it’ is a possibility, in yours and impossibility as you start with out the prerequisite, you can’t reboot a vacuum

              • b waghorn …
                16 December 2016 at 5:08 pm

                So you’re admitting that a reboot might give you some hope ?
                also i’ve got enough brain to notice you don’t need a ‘ in it is and your and should be a an

                • alwyn …
                  16 December 2016 at 5:40 pm

                  You were doing so well until you got to the second-to-last word. The “a” should have been “an”.
                  ie The last two words should both have been an.

                  “Use an before a word that starts with a vowel sound. If it does not start with a vowel sound, use a. For example. “a man” but “an elephant”.
                  http://www.grammar-monster.com/lessons/an_or_a.htm

                  Here endeth the lesson. It is Friday night and I’m going home.

                  • Muttonbird …
                    16 December 2016 at 5:55 pm

                    Just ‘an’ would suffice. But there’s you wading in on grammar when you are not that good at it.

                    Do you troll after hours too? I bet you do.

                  • b waghorn …
                    16 December 2016 at 6:42 pm

                    5 ciders in and i’m just confused now will be back to decipher it in the morn.

                  • Doogs …
                    17 December 2016 at 1:22 pm

                    Look Alwyn, I’m going to say something to you, and you won’t like it. But that won’t be a foreign feeling to you because of the time you spend ‘not-liking’ just about everything anyone says on this site.

                    {You were doing so well until you got to the second-to-last word.
                    The “a” should have been “an”.
                    ie The last two words should both have been an.}
                    (second to last doesn’t need hyphens, i.e. is an abbreviation and therefore needs full stops and your final “an” should be in quotation marks)

                    {“Use an before a word that starts with a vowel sound. If it does not
                    start with a vowel sound, use a. For example. “a man” but “an
                    elephant”.}
                    (the word ‘sound’ is redundant, a vowel is a sound, both “an” and “a” need to be in quotation marks, you also need to close the quotation marks you opened at the beginning of your statement)

                    Sounds fussy? Is fussy! But a pedant like you will understand that. Basically, people who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

                    • alwyn …
                      20 December 2016 at 1:20 pm

                      A shame that I didn’t notice this earlier.
                      “I’m going to say something to you, and you won’t like it”.
                      Actually I found it hilarious. You got nearly all of it wrong.

                      For example you appear to think that
                      “the word ‘sound’ is redundant”. It is most definitely NOT redundant. If I took it out it would say that you only use ‘an’ before words that start with the vowels.
                      You use it if the word SOUNDS as if it starts with a vowel.

                      Thus you say ‘a Xerox machine’ but ‘an X-ray machine’. The first is pronounced as if it started ‘ze’. The second is pronounced as if it started with a vowel as in ‘eks’.

                      The rest of you contribution is equally silly.

                • Red …
                  16 December 2016 at 7:47 pm

                  Waghorn is a grammar corrector, always a popular person to have around, predictable I guess with name that denotes a trumpet blower or blow hard

      • Cinny 1.1.2
        16 December 2016 at 12:09 pm

        Alwyn a cabinet appears to be something that the outgoing government does not have and very soon all they will have is a caucus.

      • Pat 1.1.3
        16 December 2016 at 1:02 pm

        believe the opposition spokespeople on portfolios are referred to as a shadow cabinet….but then you knew that.

        • alwyn 1.1.3.1
          16 December 2016 at 2:31 pm

          Not usually.
          Parties, particularly ones as small as we have in New Zealand Oppositions are usually all given a position of being spokespersons about something.
          I mean Delahunty is the Green spokesperson on Education. Can you seriously consider her a possibility on getting into Cabinet?
          And can you really imagine Rurawhe as being Minister of Internal Affairs?
          Seriously?
          In Britain it may be the case but they only bother to nominate a limited number of official spokesmen.

          • Pat 1.1.3.1.1
            16 December 2016 at 3:16 pm

            good grief…..are you still in short pants?

          • William 1.1.3.1.2
            16 December 2016 at 3:54 pm

            Good grief indeed!
            From the linked RNZ story

            “…and moves into the Shadow Cabinet.”

            You’d better contact RNZ and set them straight.
            If you google “shadow cabinet nz” you’ll find many instances of its use here.

            • alwyn 1.1.3.1.2.1
              16 December 2016 at 5:48 pm

              I wouldn’t take RNZ as an authority on anything. The Herald gets it right.
              They aren’t very good but the Herald is better than RNZ.

              Look at their story. Little clearly distinguishes the Shadow Cabinet from the Caucus when he says
              “In other changes, Clare Curran will take on the ICT role and move into Labour’s shadow Cabinet.”
              whereas he only says of Wood
              “Michael Wood will take on consumer affairs, revenue and ethnic communities, which Little said reflected the diverse population in the Mt Roskill electorate.”

              http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11768277

              • Cinny …
                16 December 2016 at 7:38 pm

                looks over at Alwyns bookshelf…. dude is that the ‘National Party Thesaurus of Propaganda’ sitting there on the shelf? I knew there was such a thing Alwyn, i just knew it.

                • alwyn …
                  16 December 2016 at 8:43 pm

                  And to think that earlier today you seemed willing to discuss things in a reasonably sensible manner.
                  Why did you change so much?
                  I am not, and never have been a member of the National Party. I have never been a member of any party. I refuse to hand over control of my opinions to a pack of lunatics.

                  I vote for the party I think will provide the best Government for New Zealand. Since 1981 that has been 6 National, 5 Labour and 1 where I did not vote. Since 2005 it has been all National. The Labour party had an appalling manifesto in 2005 and have got steadily worse.

                  • Cinny …
                    16 December 2016 at 8:53 pm

                    Dude, I didn’t realise you were so sensitive, apologies. I’m sure that party has their own thesaurus.

                    Hey re the Kaikoura one farmer opinion. Friends from ChCh rung tonight wanting to come up and stay, yay. Anyways they are stopping to visit family in Kaikoura on the way up here, so will ask them to ask about Brownlee and report back to you 😀 Having been through the ChCh quake themselves they will have a good understanding of the situation as will their family in Kaikoura

    • Wellfedweta 1.2
      16 December 2016 at 2:36 pm

      Given how tiny Labour’s caucus is, and how inept most of them are, it would have been staggering if he had not been given some responsibility.

      • Muttonbird 1.2.1
        16 December 2016 at 2:40 pm

        Were you one of the right wing trolls who claimed Michael Wood was a nothing patsie and would sit on the back bench for years?

        I think you were.

        I think you are terrified of the connection to voters Michael Wood and the new Labour campaign strategy represents.

        • Wellfedweta 1.2.1.1
          16 December 2016 at 3:47 pm

          No. I rate Michael Wood, and he being a white male he defies Laboursstupid quota ideology. And my mum voted for him.

        • Red 1.2.1.2
          16 December 2016 at 3:54 pm

          We are all trembling at labours talent 😨

          • Muttonbird 1.2.1.2.1
            16 December 2016 at 4:17 pm

            John Key trembled so much he quit the very next day with his tail between his legs! 🙂

            • Wellfedweta 1.2.1.2.1.1
              16 December 2016 at 5:08 pm

              8 years. 4 Labour leaders. Key got the last word wouldn’t you say.

              • Muttonbird …
                16 December 2016 at 5:14 pm

                Was Key’s job to see Labour leaders off? I thought it was to do stuff for the betterment of all New Zealanders.

                Key quit when he saw the writing on the wall. In short, he’s a coward.

                • Wellfedweta …
                  16 December 2016 at 5:16 pm

                  Of course it is part of his job. Perhaps the left haven’t realised that yet!! Key quit on top, having delivered a better NZ than he inherited. At record levels of popularity. But keep fantasising..,it’s worked for Labour for the past 3 elections…not.

                  • Muttonbird …
                    16 December 2016 at 5:25 pm

                    That was the entirety of his job and you can tell because he did nothing else.

                    This follows from the very birth of the National party which I’m told was set up to oppose progressive policy from Labour and to protect business owners (wtf?).

                    Key did this, stopped any policy which might help the disenfranchised and vulnerable. Interesting to note too that Farrar’s website mirrors the concept of the National party’s existence in the most of the posts are critical of a Labour party which isn’t even in power. It seems the penguin exists solely to prevent underprivileged people from amounting to anything.

                  • Leftie …
                    16 December 2016 at 10:14 pm

                    Doing a runner before even completing his term because he knew he was a goneburger is not going out on top Wellfedweta.

                    • wellfedweta …
                      17 December 2016 at 7:44 am

                      Polling at record high levels of popularity is not a sign of someone who is ‘goneburger’.

                    • Leftie …
                      17 December 2016 at 1:48 pm

                      Obviously brand key was no longer cutting it. The thrashing key got in Roskill puts doubt on the more recent record high opinion polling.

                  • Leftie …
                    16 December 2016 at 10:17 pm

                    John key doing a runner before even completely his term, because he knew he was a goneburger, is not going out on top wellfedweka

              • Leftie …
                16 December 2016 at 10:20 pm

                How many National leaders did Clark see off when National was in opposition for 9 years then?

                So John key doing a runner after getting thrashed in the Mt Roskill by election means Andrew Little has seen off John key.

                • wellfedweta …
                  17 December 2016 at 7:46 am

                  1. Andrew Little has never won any political contest he has contested.
                  2. In 9 years of Clark government, National had 2 leaders before John Key. Clark was an excellent politician, and she saw off 1 less than Key, who ultimately spanked her.

                  • Leftie …
                    17 December 2016 at 2:00 pm

                    Shipley, English, Brash, so John key was the 4th National leader when National was in opposition for 9 years. Looks like your attempt at political point scoring got evenly matched, wouldn’t you say?

                    I think Labour’s landslide victory over National in the Mt Roskill by election is testimony to Andrew Little’s good leadership.

                    Excellent that Andrew Little has seen off John key. That’s how you would put it if the shoe had of been on the other foot, correct?

                    • Wellfedweta …
                      17 December 2016 at 7:07 pm

                      If you’re including Shipley, We need to add Clark to Key’s tally. So, Clark saw off 3 National leaders in 3 elections over 9 years before getting thrashed by Key. Key has seen off 4 leaders (Clark, Goff, Shearer and Cunliffe) in only 8 years. So as I said, one better.

                    • Leftie …
                      17 December 2016 at 7:46 pm

                      Nope. Helen Clark didn’t remain Labour’s leader after the 2008 election, however Jenny Shipley continued to lead the National Party until October 2001, when Bill English rolled her for the leadership. So John Key saw off 3, Goff, Shearer and Cunliffe, before he bailed out, dropped his government in it and did a runner without completing his term, after getting the drubbing of his life in Roskill. Opposition leader, Andrew Little saw key off and obviously is the one that did better.

                    • Leftie …
                      17 December 2016 at 7:47 pm

                      Nope. Helen Clark didn’t remain Labour’s leader after the 2008 election, however Jenny Shipley continued to lead the National Party until October 2001, when Bill English rolled her for the leadership. So John Key saw off 3, Goff, Shearer and Cunliffe, before he bailed out, dropped his government in it and did a runner, without completing his term, after getting the drubbing of his life in Roskill. Opposition leader, Andrew Little saw key off and obviously is the one that did better

                  • Leftie …
                    17 December 2016 at 2:03 pm

                    Hopefully this time the comment posts.
                    Shipley, English, Brash, so John key was the 4th National leader when National was in opposition for 9 years. Looks like your attempt at political point scoring got evenly matched, wouldn’t you say?

                    I think Labour’s landslide victory over National in the Mt Roskill by election is testimony to Andrew Little’s good leadership.

                    Excellent that Andrew Little has seen off John key. That’s how you would put it if the shoe had of been on the other foot, correct?

                  • Leftie …
                    17 December 2016 at 2:05 pm

                    Third time lucky to get this posted.
                    Shipley, English, Brash, so John key was the 4th National leader when National was in opposition for 9 years. Looks like your attempt at political point scoring got evenly matched, wouldn’t you say?

                    I think Labour’s landslide victory over National in the Mt Roskill by election is testimony to Andrew Little’s good leadership.

                    Excellent that Andrew Little has seen off John key. That’s how you would put it if the shoe had of been on the other foot, correct?

                  • Leftie …
                    17 December 2016 at 2:08 pm

                    Hmm, Shipley, English, Brash, so John key was the 4th National leader when National was in opposition for 9 years. Looks like your attempt at political point scoring got evenly matched, wouldn’t you say?

                    I think Labour’s landslide victory over National in the Mt Roskill by election is testimony to Andrew Little’s good leadership.

                    Excellent that Andrew Little has seen off John key. That’s how you would put it if the shoe had of been on the other foot, correct?

            • Leftie 1.2.1.2.1.2
              16 December 2016 at 10:10 pm

              True. Spot on Muttonbird on all of your comments.

    • Grantoc 1.3
      16 December 2016 at 7:52 pm

      Woods appointment is more a function of a desperate shortage of talent in the Labour caucus from which to choose from.

      There’s every chance he will still sink without trace.

      • Muttonbird 1.3.1
        16 December 2016 at 7:54 pm

        Shortage of talent? Michael Wood just man-shamed the entire National Party campaign team. 🙂

        • Leftie 1.3.1.1
          16 December 2016 at 10:30 pm

          Yes Muttonbird, and National and it’s supporters have been downplaying that fact ever since.

        • Leftie 1.3.1.2
          16 December 2016 at 10:39 pm

          Hope it posts this time. Yes Muttonbird, and National and it’s supporters, including the media, have been downplaying that very fact ever since.

      • Anne 1.3.2
        16 December 2016 at 8:03 pm

        Wood’s appointment is a function of the huge regard for the exceptional talent and ability to work extremely hard new member of the caucus team who also exhibits youthful charisma. Very smart move by Andrew Little.

  2. Cinny 2
    16 December 2016 at 12:04 pm

    Awesome work there Alpha, leading the way, diverse well thought out selection.

    If Laila is selected to stand for Labour I’ll be voting Red, for more reasons than Laila being there, but for me she would be the icing on the cake. Love your work Alpha, Seasons Greetings to the Labour Party 😀

    Meanwhile the outgoing government is falling apart, wonder if there will be any ‘retiring for family reasons’ announcements today, appears to me they don’t even have a cabinet and they are the ones in power… the stupid it hurts it really does.

    • weka 2.1
      16 December 2016 at 12:13 pm

      “If Laila is selected to stand for Labour I’ll be voting Red this year, for more reasons than Laila being there, but for me she would be the icing on the cake”

      I’d be very pleased too to see Harre back in parliament. Can I make a the case for strategic voting? If Harre wins a seat or is placed high on the list (not a given) then she gets in without your party vote.

      The risk is that if Labour get a big enough party vote they will be able to sideline the Greens, either by having them sit outside of govt, or outside of cabinet. If we want a more left wing govt rather than a centre left one, the Greens need every party vote we can give them and every extra MP that comes with that. This greatly increases the chances of a left wing govt without NZF inside, and it greatly increases the chances of the Greens being able to pull a Labour-led govt leftwards. It’s also going to give more grunt to any climate change efforts.

      If Harre doesn’t look likely to win a seat, or is not placed high on the list, then obviously Labour party votes increase her chances of getting in and that might be a worthwhile strategy.

      So, respectfully, I’m suggesting that we consider that rather than voting for what makes us feel good, we vote strategically (which might also make us feel good as well as get us a better result).

      • Sigh 2.1.1
        16 December 2016 at 12:39 pm

        If Labour don’t get at least 35% they’re not going to be able to form a credible government, which means no Greens in cabinet.

        The best thing Green voters can do to get the Greens into government is to vote Labour.

        • weka 2.1.1.1
          16 December 2016 at 1:38 pm

          So if Labour got 34% and the Greens got 17%, you think they couldn’t form govt? Please explain how that would work constitutionally.

          • Sigh 2.1.1.1.1
            16 December 2016 at 8:07 pm

            That’s a highly unlikely outcome, and in fact such a high green vote would likely scare off swinging voters Labour needs to get up into the mid-30s and beyond.

            • weka 2.1.1.1.1.1
              16 December 2016 at 8:29 pm

              Nevertheless, you said that if Labour didn’t get at least 35% they’re not going to form a credible govt. I’d like you to explain how that works constitutionally. I can’t see any reason why Labour on 34% can’t form govt if it gets enough partners. We have MMP.

        • Cinny 2.1.1.2
          16 December 2016 at 1:49 pm

          Seriously? Yeah.. nah!! it’s always depended on whom is where on the list for me. MOU all the way this time, super happy about that.

      • Cinny 2.1.2
        16 December 2016 at 1:46 pm

        awesome advice that works for me, thanks Weta, much appreciated, will do as suggested, because it makes much sense to me. Massive wisdom in your words, logical too. I’m totally behind all the opposition parties no matter where my party vote goes.

        Looking forward to the coming election MMP with strategy, that sits very well with me, was disappointed last election that the left didn’t use the system more wisely.

        • weka 2.1.2.1
          16 December 2016 at 1:49 pm

          Thanks for receiving that so well! I might put a post up about it next year, because we’re either going to get a landslide or it’s going to be close 😉 in which case every vote counts.

      • Red 2.1.3
        16 December 2016 at 2:01 pm

        Shite i thought you where voting for me for a second, unfortunately I am not standing 😀

  3. Roflcopter 3
    16 December 2016 at 1:38 pm

    Ms Cut-N-Paste back in ICT… out with the old, in with the older….

    • tc 3.1
      16 December 2016 at 2:19 pm

      Yes nothing screams ‘try harder’ more than dullard curran.

      Nice move placing nash where he can be watched and kept busy, the lads a schemer andy but you know that.

      • b waghorn 3.1.1
        16 December 2016 at 3:28 pm

        i’ve got a huntaway like that , if you keep him busy it’s algood , but take your eye of him for a second and he’s liable to go piss on the judges leg.

    • Matthew Whitehead 3.2
      17 December 2016 at 7:54 pm

      It’s like, an objectively weird decision. If you wanted to go by seniority, you’d promote Dyson. If you wanted to go by competence, you’d promote Wall into shadow cabinet. There is no objective mode of decision that concludes Curran is qualified to be in any cabinet, shadow- or otherwise.

      I mean, I know Labour’s caucus is small, but come on, it’s not Clare Curran in Cabinet small, and she can’t be that good a networker, because come on, listen to the woman speak.

      The only conclusion I can come up with is that she’s figured out where some skeletons are buried and as such she’s now in with the in crowd in Labour.

  4. pdm 4
    16 December 2016 at 5:41 pm

    Labour 34 and Greens 17 – dream on.

    This may be feasible:

    Labour 25
    Greens 12

    More than a bit short I think.

    • weka 4.1
      16 December 2016 at 8:30 pm

      I was making a technical argument about how govt form. Go read my comment again and what it was replying to.

  5. James 5
    16 December 2016 at 6:07 pm

    Woods the spokesperson for ethnic communities.

    Another white male in a suit – seems like the ideal candidate to discuss ethnic communities.

    • Muttonbird 5.1
      16 December 2016 at 6:23 pm

      The people of Mt Roskill thought so by a factor of 2 to 1. And that against a Indian and a woman.

      He must be pretty good!

      • b waghorn 5.1.1
        16 December 2016 at 6:45 pm

        quite possible proving why having set gender/ethnic goals is a load of shit

        • Anne 5.1.1.1
          16 December 2016 at 7:24 pm

          There’s plenty of good in having gender/ethnic goals but imo it shouldn’t be set in stone. There are other important factors to also be taken into account like electorate geography, social, qualifications and personality settings.

          It’s long been my view that to force a candidate onto an electorate for gender or ethnic reasons only without looking at the other considerations will always be counter-productive.

    • Sigh 5.2
      16 December 2016 at 8:09 pm

      You should talk to actual ethnic communities. They love michael.

      • Muttonbird 5.2.1
        16 December 2016 at 8:12 pm

        Ha, as if James has anything to do with ethnic people.

        • james 5.2.1.1
          16 December 2016 at 10:09 pm

          Are you inferring Im racist?

          • Nick 5.2.1.1.1
            16 December 2016 at 11:28 pm

            I am racist, cant staaaaand those natz politicians….although lots seem to be leaving the sinking canoe…. their captain went first which was against the protocol (did he read the captains manual ? – oh right, he said he wasn’t given the manual).

            • Cinny 5.2.1.1.1.1
              17 December 2016 at 12:19 am

              Nick, you simply appear confused

              Racist = a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others

              Personally am not into racism, by crikey imagine the extra time it would take up, only a fool would place limits like that on themselves.

              Mos def agree with you about the sinking canoe, wonder what Sunday will bring?

              it’s still a lack lustre bunch in blue, even after many have left the canoe, and the back benchers are rather dull too, can’t think of many ‘stand outs’ can you?

            • James 5.2.1.1.1.2
              17 December 2016 at 8:37 am

              Given around 50% of the voting population vote national – you much have a bitter life.

    • Gabby 5.3
      17 December 2016 at 11:01 am

      Lots of Irish have an ethnic.

  6. timbeau 6
    16 December 2016 at 9:33 pm

    So does Parker keep Finance as well?