Labour’s list – diversity and renewal

Written By: - Date published: 7:01 am, May 3rd, 2017 - 112 comments
Categories: election 2017, labour - Tags: ,

Labour has delivered a list of diversity and renewal. Good to see it getting the recognition it deserves.

Sam Sachdeva at Newsroom:

Little focuses on diversity, not division at Labour list announcement
…
Speaking at the party’s Wellington headquarters, Little said he wanted a list “that was as reflective and representative of New Zealand as possible”, including those from the Chinese and Indian communities.

“We made the big mistake last time of having them too far down and we’ve been in the embarrassing position up until recently of having no Chinese or Indian MP for the Labour Party – that won’t happen again after 2017.”

Asked why there were no Māori MPs in the top 15 spots, he said Labour would have “one of the biggest levels of Māori representation in the history of New Zealand politics” between its list MPs and those running only in the Māori seats.
…
He denied Labour’s constitutional requirement for a caucus of at least 50 percent women had led to difficulties, and insisted that female candidates chosen were there solely on their ability. …

Simon Wilson at The Spinoff:

It’s not just about Willie: sizing up the Labour Party list
…
But the big takeout from the Labour list … is really that the newbie candidates likely to become MPs are, on the whole, an impressive bunch. Labour has moved to fix a problem at the last election, when they failed to renew well. On RNZ today Andrew Little said they were “rubbish” at it in 2014, and the consequence is that the party is a little short of talented and experienced MPs this time round. But then, you could say that about all the parties, including the government incumbents.
…
…Labour now has a 50:50 gender rule. The party looks at its likely electorate winners and uses the list to try to even out any imbalance. That means, this year, more women are on the list in the winnable higher spots than men.

No, it’s not a “man ban”. Men are obviously not banned. It’s gender balancing to reflect the party’s desire to overcome unconscious and historical biases, and if you’re worried about that ask yourself if there’s a better way of getting roughly equal numbers of men and women in Parliament.

Yes, it does frustrate the ambitions of some male candidates and their supporters. But it will also delight some women candidates and their supporters. And is there anyone who wants to argue our Parliament will be worse off for having more women in it? Didn’t think so.
…
One thing that should be very clear: Labour desperately wants to form the next government. They really hate being in opposition. Its party list is full of people who are, on the whole, determined to do their bit to help the party succeed. Andrew Little might not have succeeded in having Willie Jackson placed as high as he wanted, but he was never going to allow Jackson or anyone else to push the party around once it was decided. The determination remains, and there’s a little lesson in that for Jackson.

Vernon Small on Stuff:

Labour list promotes women among likely new MPs – but Jackson stalled at 21
…
Little said he was “excited that Labour will take into the General Election a strong caucus supported by a fresh team of candidates who reflect New Zealand’s diversity”. “I can’t wait to hit the campaign trail with them.”
…
As part of a clear push to expand the racial diversity of the caucus, Priyanca Radhakrishnan, who is standing in the semi-marginal seat of Maungakiekie is ranked 11 and list MP Raymond Huo is at 12.

Tauranga candidate, primary school principal Jan Tinetti is at 14 followed by the two highest-ranked Maori candidate on the list; Northland candidate, councillor Willow-Jean Prime at 16 and East Coast candidate, lawyer Kiri Allan at 20 just ahead of Jackson. …

Even 8 year old Patrick Gower sort of gets it:

Labour’s list is about Willow-Jean Prime, not ‘sooky-bubba’ Willie Jackson
…
Rather than Willie’s falling star, the story should be about Willow-Jean’s rising one.

This should have been a story about how Willow-Jean Prime was an outstanding new candidate with a high list spot.

She is a lawyer, young mother, a Far North district councillor. She does it all – and has got it all.

She is Māori, likeable, she fights for the North, is battle-hardened after the Northland by-election – and most importantly, she’s real.
…
This should also have been a story about the other great female candidates like top-flight lawyer Kiri Allan or policy analyst Priyanca Radhakrishnan

But Labour being Labour and Willie being Willie the story was all about his ego and him trying to bully his way up list and some standard shambolic political management. …

Actually, given the fact of Jackson’s outburst, the management was very effective. Anyway, here’s the plain spoken I/S at No Right Turn:

Labour’s list

…The most obvious feature is the generational shift within Labour – the old guard time servers are out, retired or shoved down, while MPs elected at the end of the Clark years are firmly in charge. There’s also a greater emphasis on new blood rather than incumbent protection, which should help overcome the stale feeling of the party. And with more women in winnable slots, Labour should make real progress towards the balanced caucus required by its constitution….

Labour has a page up with background on some of the new arrivals: Meet some of Labour’s fresh new faces!

National’s list will emerge from its smoke-filled rooms in due course. It will be interesting to compare the two.

112 comments on “Labour’s list – diversity and renewal ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. red-blooded 1
    3 May 2017 at 7:26 am

    Well, I think the more democratic process has delivered a damn good list. It’s particularly pleasing to see such strong new faces and to see a list that looks like NZ. True, there could have been more emphasis on high ranking for Māori, but there’s going to be a real push to win those seats again and that should help to balance things out. It’s great to see such talented people standing up and wanting to make a difference through the Labour Party. Little and the party organisers deserve recognition for gathering together this group of candidates.

    • lprent 1.1
      3 May 2017 at 8:22 am

      I was just impressed that the new list selection process was (eventually and despite whining by Willie) got adhered to.

      The rationale for bringing new blood into parliament happened. The provincial areas where Labour is weak gets more representation. And the list generally balances between the need to have experience in parliament with the need to keep turning over the MPs. I particularly like the skills that likely new MPs are going to bring into parliament.

      Sure some of them won’t work out. After all if you are competent in what you do, then who’d want to be MP? Some candidates will be there because of a sense of excess civic duty. Others because they just like the limelight. Some will just have problems with the byzantine culture of the political and bureaucratic space. Bloody hard to figure out some of this in advance.

      But I’m pretty sure that the new selection system is going to be better at weeding out the deadweight than the old one was.

      That the female representation will probably increase in Labour and the Greens is merely a reflection of where the politics operates. 50+% of the voters are women. A greater proportion make up the members of political parties. I guess that is why we get dickheads whining about it so much. God knows why. Talent rises where is arises and appears to have bugger all to do with gender.

      Of course I’m not happy with the list. But I’m always interested in improving process and seldom happy with anything. However I think it was a pretty good try and capable of being built on next time.

      National has been doing all of these things for quite some time but from a much shallower and inadequate talent pool. It is about time that Labour caught up a bit.

  2. Tiger Mountain 2
    3 May 2017 at 8:04 am

    Willow-Jean is a standout, she is everywhere in the North, and supported the Idea Services/IHC strike and picket in Whangarei last week too–never trust an MP or aspiring MP that does not attend workers union actions!

    when Winston retires she will hopefully go all out and take the Northland seat, voting blue in the marginalised Far North is a bad habit that can be changed and must be changed

  3. Nick 3
    3 May 2017 at 8:09 am

    Yes looks like a good Government…. Willie is a hard worker and motivated, a good spot for him.

  4. marty mars 4
    3 May 2017 at 8:25 am

    pretty good list – well done labour – I’d like more Māori higher on the list to reflect the partnership of the treaty. The reasons given for that not to be the case are unconvincing to me – sure hope the Māori Labour MP’s can get up to the mark and get their seats.

    • michelle 4.1
      3 May 2017 at 8:41 am

      Labour will get all the maori seat bar one marty mars many of our people are sick and tired of the maori party and gnats

    • Enough is Enough 4.2
      3 May 2017 at 9:41 am

      Yep that is my only criticism as well.

      I would have preferred some higher ranking Maori candidates, even if they are at number 21 in place of Jackson who has a rather inflated opinion of his own importance.

  5. ianmac 5
    3 May 2017 at 8:43 am

    Be interesting to see if the National List gets the same scrutiny later in the year.
    Did Willie have a “hissy fit”? Is Willie a “falling star”? How did the world know that Willie was “upset”?

    • Karen 5.1
      3 May 2017 at 9:51 am

      Have a listen to Willie’s interview on Checkpoint last night.

      http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/checkpoint/audio/201842381/willie-jackson-on-standing-for-labour,-and-his-list-ranking

      He didn’t fly to Wellington in a “hissy fit” but was down there for a Māori Language Board meeting. He also wanted to talk to Labour about his role as Māori Campaign organiser, which wasn’t given to him as a consolation prize as some in the media suggested. It was decided weeks ago. Yes, he was disappointed that he wasn’t in the top 10 but accepts the decision and, as he says in the interview, he wants to be in government which means Labour getting a share that would guarantee him a place.

      • ianmac 5.1.1
        3 May 2017 at 10:09 am

        Thanks Karen. So Paddy and Soper and the Awful Mike were just speaking false truths.
        Dirty Tricks still alive and well?

        • SpaceMonkey 5.1.1.1
          3 May 2017 at 11:12 am

          Yes… and it hasn’t even started properly yet.

        • marty mars 5.1.1.2
          3 May 2017 at 12:25 pm

          Lol yep it never happened it was completely made up unless you apply the salve of non partisan vision to it. Remember Jackson is known for doing stuff he later regrets. Anyway it is all a sideshow albiet entertaining and I don’t just mean Jackson.

          • Karen 5.1.1.2.1
            3 May 2017 at 12:40 pm

            I’m not a fan of Willie Jackson, but I can’t see what he has made up – everything he said is verifiable. He has admitted being disappointed and questioning his position. What is incorrect is the media claims that his only reason for being in Wellington was his disappointment at his placing and that his (unpaid) position of Māori campaign organiser was some kind of bribe. Various people have confirmed the job had been decided well before the list was announced.

            Like you (and Willie) I would have liked the Māori candidates to be higher on the list but the main thing is that there will (hopefully) be 12 Māori MPs in the Labour caucus and they will be a strong influence on policy.

            This is Meka Whaitiri on her Facebook page:

            “Labour’s 6 Maori MPs opted off this year’s party list to enable other Maori candidates to come through. On current polling of 30% and if every Labour Maori MP retains their seat, election 2017 will produce 12 Labour Maori MPs – a political first!
            Don’t get distracted by party list rankings or humbug comments about Labour not valuing its Maori members. The party list is not how we are ranked in caucus. The caucus list is what matters.
            Current caucus rankings have Davis 7, Mahuta 11, Whaitiri 13, Henare 18, Rurawhe 22 – all 5 in Labour’s shadow cabinet which positions Maori MPs well for cabinet positions.
            I have no doubt these rankings will go up when we turn out the votes. Party vote Labour, candidate vote your local Labour Maori MP and see 12 Maori MPs come to parliament and the highest number of Maori MPs in cabinet.
            We have done our bit within Labour the rest is up to you!”

            • marty mars 5.1.1.2.1.1
              3 May 2017 at 1:01 pm

              Opting off the list so more Māori could come through is a fail. As I said the other day, a double whammy for those Māori Labour MPs. Everyone is singing from the same songsheet so that is good.

          • McFlock 5.1.1.2.2
            3 May 2017 at 12:48 pm

            Jackson is a dick, but I doubt they scheduled a MLB meeting just in case he wanted to be a massive, party-damaging dick over the list selection.

            In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if the emergency meeting or whatever last night was purely to hammer out a response to the media bullshit that he was flying down to complain. If it occurred at all.

            • marty mars 5.1.1.2.2.1
              3 May 2017 at 12:56 pm

              Nothing happened it’s all fabricated – move along please nothing to see here

              • McFlock …
                3 May 2017 at 1:03 pm

                Well, if it’s not fabricated, it seems to have been beaten up.

                There’s a big difference between “being in town and moaning and seeing if the list can be changed” and “flying down just to moan and trying to get the list changed”, no?

                • marty mars …
                  3 May 2017 at 1:32 pm

                  Please no no stuff – can’t stand that.

                  I’d imagine there could be multiple reasons he had booked or did book to go. One of them likely related to the list – be interesting to know who told him and what he did after he was told. I suppose THAT is the msm story.

                  But whatever, water passed, now new things to mull over.

            • mordecai 5.1.1.2.2.2
              3 May 2017 at 11:13 pm

              You may be right, but here’s another angle. Let’s assume Jackson was unhappy with his list placing. What, then, is so wrong with Jackson expressing those concerns with his party hierarchy? This is just another beat up by desperate media.

              • McFlock …
                3 May 2017 at 11:48 pm

                Well, the issue is that the hierarchy isn’t able to overrule the selection committee in the first place. WJ should know that. And for all we know, he did, and took his lump for a very electable position.

                • mordecai …
                  6 May 2017 at 6:13 pm

                  True, but to be fair to WJ, when a party leader makes chirpy sounds to a candidate that they can expect a high list position, that candidate surely has the right to expect that party leader to be able to deliver on that promise. On current polling, WJ’s list placing is not a ‘very electable position’.

                  • McFlock …
                    6 May 2017 at 6:56 pm

                    Not if he understands the party he’s considering joining.

                    And if WJ can’t help Labour improve its position, what the fuck is he good for anyway?

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      6 May 2017 at 7:00 pm

                      Well, he got Mordecai all up on end, so he can’t be that bad 🙂

                    • mordecai …
                      9 May 2017 at 9:55 pm

                      Ok, so WJ is an idiot. He should have sought an assurance from AL that he could deliver on his promises, and not just take the leader of the Labour Party at his word. That is clear now.

                    • McFlock …
                      9 May 2017 at 10:00 pm

                      Like a true tory, you are having difficulty with the concept of “democracy”.

                      On the other hand, WJ was indeed familiar with it, despite all the media’s bluster.

                    • mordecai …
                      10 May 2017 at 10:21 am

                      “Like a true tory, you are having difficulty with the concept of “democracy”.”
                      No. You have admitted that Little cannot be trusted. You’ve even suggested that WJ was stupid to take him at his word, because the party rules contradicted his word. It seems to me the problem here is with both WJ (who trusted Little and, as you point out, should have known better) and with Little (who made a commitment he knew he couldn’t keep).

                    • McFlock …
                      10 May 2017 at 12:09 pm

                      Well, when everything came out of the woodwork the next day it showed that WJ understood Little’s comments were in the context of a democratic organisation, WJ has a very electable position, and the only confusion on the matter is yours.

                      And WJ’s flight down had been booked well in advance for a completely different event altogether.

                      Your really have nothing to stir with.

                    • mordecai …
                      10 May 2017 at 12:49 pm

                      “Well, when everything came out of the woodwork the next day it showed that WJ understood Little’s comments were in the context of a democratic organisation,”
                      One that Little claimed he could influence.
                      “WJ has a very electable position”
                      That’s not what Little promised. And it certainly isn’t what he delivered.

                    • McFlock …
                      10 May 2017 at 12:53 pm

                      One that Little claimed he could influence.

                      cite pls and quote.

                      “WJ has a very electable position”
                      That’s not what Little promised.

                      “high position”, wasn’t it (I’ll let the “promise” bs slide)? He’s high enough on the list to get elected

                      And it certainly isn’t what he delivered.

                      Yes it is, if WJ is going to help Labour improve its vote.

        • James 5.1.1.3
          4 May 2017 at 8:10 am

          Or willie is spinning the situation

      • weka 5.1.2
        3 May 2017 at 12:08 pm

        Thanks Karen. The whole thing looked like third rate shit-stirring from the MSM drama addicts.

  6. bwaghorn 6
    3 May 2017 at 9:03 am

    Any farmers on the list?

    • The decrypter 6.1
      3 May 2017 at 9:40 am

      Any “so called farmers” in NZ?

      • bwaghorn 6.1.1
        3 May 2017 at 11:51 am

        huh??

        • The decrypter 6.1.1.1
          3 May 2017 at 12:17 pm

          Proper farmers. Not just polluters.

          • bwaghorn 6.1.1.1.1
            3 May 2017 at 12:23 pm

            so i take it you don’t buy any food, drive use any fossil fuels and live in a shack made from bark , because if you do you are as guilty as the rest of use ya dick

            • The decrypter 6.1.1.1.1.1
              3 May 2017 at 12:45 pm

              Points taken. I get my food given to me, city mission etc. Car- not drivable,, but live in it.

            • marty mars 6.1.1.1.1.2
              3 May 2017 at 12:46 pm

              Mate farmers are enemy cos they vote gnat – end of. Pollution, outrageously high herd numbers, destruction of rivers via irrigation ignore if farmers vote lab.

    • mac1 6.2
      3 May 2017 at 10:34 am

      Yes. Janette Walker, No 44 on list, candidate for Kaikoura has been a farmer.

      She is standing in a rural electorate against a National MP who was bested by Damien O’Connor in a farming debate according to a Federated Farmers’ commentator cf The Press 15 April article titled “Jubilation after Rains”.

      • ianmac 6.2.1
        3 May 2017 at 11:18 am

        And Janette is a great worker and advocate so the talent above her on the List must be pretty good for her to be No 44. She cannot win against the passive sitting National Electorate MP who as a suit attends all the upmarket events but steers well clear of controversy and the needs of ordinary NZers. Pity.

        • Brendon Harre 6.2.1.1
          3 May 2017 at 11:54 am

          +1 Janette Walker is an excellent candidate who has driven several issues. Homelessness in Blenheim -proving housing is an issue across the country. She is a good fighter for workers in horticulture and wine sectors too.

          It is a shame she could not be higher on the list. I suppose it is the nature of the list beast. Good people miss out….

          • mac1 6.2.1.1.1
            3 May 2017 at 12:48 pm

            This was an editorial comment in the Marlborough Express today- “It’s been two years since we started reporting on the emergency accommodation situation in Marlborough. And two years down the track, not much has changed. In fact, if anything, it would appear the situation has worsened drastically.”

            Janette Walker is on the front page of the Express. ‘The solution was simple: the Government, which had “completely ignored there was a housing crisis in this country”, needed to build more bloody houses”, she said.’

            The situation in Marlborough, with 1% of NZ’s population, is that the number of social houses has dropped from 434 in 2012 to 405 in 2017, the number of Priority A applicants for housing is 45 and Priority B were 18, totalling 63. In September 2015. only 13 were on this register.

            Janette Walker had probably herself found placings for 80% of those who had been assisted with Emergency Housing Special needs grants. $100,000 per month spent in Marlborough on motels for this purpose.

            Yes, Brendon Harre, and ianmac, you’re both right.

    • weka 6.3
      3 May 2017 at 12:10 pm

      https://www.greens.org.nz/candidates/john-hart at #12 Should get in on current polling.

      oops, wrong party 😉

      • Matthew Whitehead 6.3.1
        3 May 2017 at 11:59 pm

        We’ll also have to see if he stays at #12 after the ranking vote (which will end midday friday) and the executive re-shuffle of its results so that it preserves diversity in the list, although I think it’s likely as the party knows it needs to appeal to rural environmentalists too. I voted him at… *checks* Ah, #13, so I thought they had him positioned correctly, I just needed some space to fit in people above him that really deserved a higher rank than they got in the initial list. 🙂 *cough Golriz cough*

        • weka 6.3.1.1
          4 May 2017 at 4:34 pm

          hmm, I wasn’t going to bother voting but I might now, thanks.

          • Matthew Whitehead 6.3.1.1.1
            4 May 2017 at 6:36 pm

            You haven’t got long, but yes, you (and any other Green eligible members on this site who haven’t yet) should definitely vote before noon tomorrow. There are a lot of talented new candidates that might deserve a bump into a more electable position. I was particularly looking at Golriz, Leilani Tamu, Teanu Tuiono, Elizabeth Kerekere, Julie Zhu, Hayley Holt, and Ricardo Menendez-March, although some of them I didn’t find an electable position to bump them into because there’s so much talent in the Party this election.

            And even if you’re mostly happy with the initial list, you should still vote for it as given, (or close to) so that you’re giving weight to the MPs who were ranked highly in the initial list and they don’t get dragged too far down the list unless the party has overlooked someone really popular.

            You do have to click 42 boxes, but if you have the initial list open at the same time, then it’s relatively easy to just view it as making a couple tweaks and then going off the initial list where you think it’s correct or you just don’t know the candidates well enough.

  7. john 7
    3 May 2017 at 10:11 am

    Barring David Parker, there isn’t a single person in the top 30 that is either experienced or competent to run a department.

    [lprent: So you are arguing that the 5th National government were inexperienced and incompetent? Bil English was the ONLY cabinet minister that transferred between the 4th and 5th National governments.

    Basically if you want to astroturf a meme, then I suggest that you aren’t postulating that you are a pig-ignorant fuckwit of a troll. Put up links or explanation s. This is will be your only warning. ]]

    • fisiani 7.1
      3 May 2017 at 10:51 am

      When Parker is the only person with Cabinet experience that is asking NZ to put their trust in hope rather than in experience. This problem will get even worse in 2020 when Parker retires after 12 fruitless years in Opposition. The talk of renewal is reminiscent of talk about were to place the deckchairs on the Titanic. I love the optimism here. It could power the National Grid.

      [lprent: Ok – enough, You know better than to try to use this kind of factless astroturf here. Banned until 1 month after the election. ]

      • KJT 7.1.1
        3 May 2017 at 12:18 pm

        Rather than National who cannot even run a coal company.

        It has been suggested that Trump would have done more damage to that Syrian airport ,if he had been put in charge of “running it as a business”.

        Given past experience, that also applies to all of ACT and National.

    • McFlock 7.2
      3 May 2017 at 12:37 pm

      How many are dumb enough to give ministerial signoff to phrases like “seven out of eight mission-critical issues have been resolved or are near to being resolved” and authorise live launch of a payroll system? Because the nats have three, at least.

    • lprent 7.3
      3 May 2017 at 12:40 pm

      john & fisiani..

      Pretty much exactly what I said about National in 2008…

      I think it was Bill English in cabinet and if you were stretching a point and had very low standards – Nick Smith. Ah nope just English. Smith would have been a hanger on.

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_National_Government_of_New_Zealand#Cabinet_Ministers
      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_National_Government_of_New_Zealand

      Your point is?

      That you are a ignorant political fool?

      • john 7.3.1
        3 May 2017 at 12:56 pm

        Growing economy, falling unemployment, ahead of international norms, passing Australia.
        The problems we have are first world problems.
        So the success of the National govt. is evident to ALL in this WORLD,(where the praise is coming from) except to the delusional poster on this blog.
        It’s not what you say you’ll do, or what legislation you pass…….it’s what impact it has on the people. We have record numbers of Kiwi’s returning home (over the past 3 years)…the exact opposite of under Auntie helen.

    • john 7.4
      3 May 2017 at 1:01 pm

      Reply to moderator…….why…..did you?? Put up links etc…no…meaning this is a free speech opinion piece.

      • McFlock 7.4.1
        3 May 2017 at 1:05 pm

        “free speech opinion piece”

        lol. Also known as “unsubstantiated bullshit”.

        • john 7.4.1.1
          3 May 2017 at 1:22 pm

          Fine and that is your opinion, thanks for expressing it…..Promise genuine NO sarcasm.

          • McFlock 7.4.1.1.1
            3 May 2017 at 2:16 pm

            Thing is, both experience and competence are demonstrable characteristics in their existence or their lack.

            In addition to Parker, ISTR both Dyson and O’Connor have held ministerial portfolis. So your “opinion piece” is objectively wrong from the get-go, even if we exclude both associate ministers or spending years as portfolio spokespeople from being relevant experience towards running a department.

            • john 7.4.1.1.1.1
              3 May 2017 at 2:55 pm

              Both were incompetent in those rolls (Dyson and O’Connor)

              • McFlock …
                3 May 2017 at 3:00 pm

                Well, semantically you made an “either/or” claim, which is demonstably false.

                As to competence, can you point to any particular act or group of acts which demonstrates or exemplifies their incompetence as ministers?

                • john …
                  3 May 2017 at 3:47 pm

                  Dyson Drink driving before she had even been in the job a year
                  Minister of social Development….over saw a mess there.

                  O’Connor…Minister of Tourism…….WOW the difference between non existent to john Key….massive growth.
                  Also Minister of Immigration, under the years of MASSIVE Emigration from New Zealand. That have now been coming back in their 10’s of thousands for years now.

                  • One Anonymous Bloke …
                    3 May 2017 at 4:01 pm

                    Um, you do realise that net migration of NZ citizens is still negative, right? We’re losing 1700 odd a year, which is the lowest figure since 1984 or so, but it’s still a loss.

                    As for the people who, unlike recent migrants, have lived here long enough to know the difference, we can see how the ‘brighter future’ is panning out for the most vulnerable members of our community.

                    Increasing numbers of Kiwis can’t even afford to leave any more.

                  • McFlock …
                    3 May 2017 at 4:06 pm

                    Dyson’s dui wasn’t a ministerial function. And after that, she spent several years as a competent minister anyway.

                    As for the others… so, you need to ignore the GFC and all sorts of geopolitical stuff in order to argue that key was better than O’Connor, and it still doesn’t mean O’C was incompetent.

                    Basically, you have nothing that points to actual ministerial incompetence, do you? Just your desire to fellate key’s political corpse.

                    • john …
                      3 May 2017 at 6:14 pm

                      Come on…really the GFC happened at mid- end of 2008 after Labour was already going out the door.
                      They had already put us into a “technical recession” one year before the GFC….incompetent is a polite word for the way all labour ministers behaved.

                    • McFlock …
                      3 May 2017 at 9:46 pm

                      You misunderstand – the GFC was “global”. Your so-called “technical” recession was still leaving us in a better position than much of the planet, hence your immigration figures.

                      But you still haven’t given an example of actual incompetence, like maybe signing a lease renewal and forgetting about signing it and claiming the previous government was responsible. Or having to return to the House and correct a previously firm statement to say you don’t remember. Those would be pretty stupid things for a minister to do, eh.

              • Psycho Milt …
                3 May 2017 at 3:51 pm

                Well, if we’re taking personal assessments of competence into account, my assessment is that most of National’s Cabinet are incompetent in their roles, so there’s no disadvantage to swapping them out for a Labour Cabinet.

                • john …
                  3 May 2017 at 6:17 pm

                  Opinion not assessment.
                  After all, the economy is growing at levels that rate highly on international comparisons, unemployment is down, labour participation is up, inflation is still low, so incompetent is NOT a word that comes readily to mind.
                  I am not saying I agree with all they do, or that they can’t do better. We should always expect more.
                  But Labour/Greens/ NZ First are NOT the answer.

                  • Liberal Realist …
                    3 May 2017 at 7:21 pm

                    Opinion not assessment.
                    After all, the economy is growing at levels that rate highly on international comparisons, unemployment is down, labour participation is up, inflation is still low, so incompetent is NOT a word that comes readily to mind.
                    I am not saying I agree with all they do, or that they can’t do better. We should always expect more.
                    But Labour/Greens/ NZ First are NOT the answer.

                    Here’s my assessment of your opinion:

                    Economic growth:
                    If measured on a per capita basis GDP doesn’t look great.

                    Unemployment is down:
                    Underutilization of the workforce is up. The casualisation of the workforce is likely at play here.

                    Labour participation is up:
                    While this may be true so is underutilization. More people working but not working as much as they’d want to.

                    Inflation is low:
                    CPI does not include house price growth and in it’s current form is a crappy means of measuring ‘inflation’ IMO.

                    The few things I can think of that National are really competent at are:
                    -Taking orders from their paymasters
                    -Fund raising (cabinet club dinners)
                    -Focus group / Poll based policy formation
                    -Locating Narcissists to become National MPs
                    -Increasing national debt
                    -Convincing their supporters to vote against their best interests

                    Can you honestly say that Gerry Brownlee is competent for example? How about Paula Bennett? Simon Bridges? Todd Barkley? Remember Aaron Gilmour?

                    You think a tired 4th term National government IS the answer?

    • Matthew Whitehead 7.5
      4 May 2017 at 12:05 am

      All you’re basically saying is that Labour’s been in opposition a while. It’s normal that you have to induct new ministers in that situation, you just need people with the relevant experience in key portfolio areas to take up that mantle, and Labour, unlike National, actually pays some attention to competence in government as well as appeal to the electorate. (Not that they’ve quite got the talent overflow problem the Greens currently have, where basically every MP in a semi-electable position is front-bench material, but that’s mainly because there’s still a little bit of dead wood that’s being overvalued in the party, but not so much it’s unreasonable. Clearly the new list criteria are doing a good job in that regard)

      I am pretty damn critical of Labour, and looking at this list I am very optimistic of their chances not only at campaigning, but at putting together an effective caucus that can work together with the Greens to form the core of a highly competent government that can maybe turn around some of our policy woes. Really the only thing that bothers me about this list is that with the likely electorates that will be won, it’s probably not going to deliver enough women unless Labour get a landslide result up in the 40s.

  8. Reality 8
    3 May 2017 at 11:10 am

    Fisiani, in the interest of balance, please outline the cabinet experience of National members after nine years in opposition. And despite Nick Smith being one who had been a minister, could you say he has been a success? Everything he touches, even after having been a minister, has been a 0 out of 10.

    John Key had never been in government and became PM. Perhaps that was why there were so many “I don’t recall” “lack of frankness” etc etc along those lines.

    • ianmac 8.1
      3 May 2017 at 11:18 am

      +100 Reality.

    • john 8.2
      3 May 2017 at 12:58 pm

      You don’t need “cabinet” experience…you need an intellect and an ability to run an organization successfully apart from Parker they are all incompetent.

      • One Anonymous Bloke 8.2.1
        3 May 2017 at 3:50 pm

        Yeah, you said that.

      • Matthew Whitehead 8.2.2
        4 May 2017 at 12:13 am

        I’m going to assume you’re defining “organisation” pretty narrowly there, perhaps as “business or government department?” Because there’s actually a lot of management experience in the Labour list if you look closely, it’s just in the kinds of organisations right-wingers don’t like, like unions, or iwi. (Although liberal right-wingers have been warming up a bit on that front, so ka pai I guess?)

        Parker is competent in a very particularly, articulate kinda way. You also need passion, and empathy, and straightforwardness/honesty in a caucus. Those qualities are just as important to good management, and being a minister is just a more stressful version of being a manager of any other type.

    • Matthew Whitehead 8.3
      4 May 2017 at 12:08 am

      To be fair, having observed Nick Smith in Parliament and having talked to people who have worked for him, I would argue that Nick Smith is actually highly competent, it’s just that he’s usually given portfolios where his job is actually to undermine the portfolio focus to meet the National Party’s unstated goals of enriching elites and plundering the natural environment. It’s not exactly honest work, but it’s not the same thing as having a reverse-midas touch. If you want an example of that, we should really be looking at Brownlee.

  9. The Weatherman 9
    3 May 2017 at 11:45 am

    Iain Lees-Galloway for PM!

    And, no, I’m not kidding. I would love to see another woman leader but a man with actual balls, credibility, and a moral sensibility that can’t be easily twisted would be pretty decent too.

    Don’t get me wrong, though, I like Andrew Little, too.

    But it’s guys like Iain, who rise just high enough to become cream without turning to scum that I’ll always back.

    Ideal would have been Helen Kelly, of course! Still mourning her here.

    I hope 2017/2018 will be the year that the Labour Party returns to its – sorry – everyperson roots: black, white, brown, long time NZr or immigrant, fighting for fairness and access to justice for all: a party that will win back the popular vote (when all the scandals are finally out come election time and NZrs realize how badly they’ve been had – oh, and have they been had).

    To me, Iain stands for that more than anyone in the Labour party right now. Again, Little is a gem also. But Iain… I’d turn gay for him if I was that way inclined.

    People say it’s not possible for Labour to lead a majority government this coming election.

    I say: never say never!

    Miracles can happen; so can mass realizations.

    • Matthew Whitehead 9.1
      4 May 2017 at 12:18 am

      Iain has been really problematic in his rhetoric around immigration. Him being PM would only be marginally better than Winston, at least until he gets his act together and realises that the call to turn down the tap on migration has to be about providing for good infrastructure and quality of life for people who we DO let in, rather than nativist sentiments about immigrants “takin’ our jerbs.” The reality is that immigration is vastly beneficial, and even if it wasn’t, if you like New Zealand at its current population density, we don’t actually have a choice but to have SOME immigration.

      That’s not to say I don’t like the man when he gets it right on other policy issues, but I don’t want to hear from him on immigration ever again in his political career, please and thankyou. He’s hardly any better than the whole chinese-sounding names debacle.

  10. Upnorth 10
    3 May 2017 at 11:47 am

    Still heavily weighted with union people do you think?
    What about muslim candidates?
    Some good choices though

    • KJT 10.1
      3 May 2017 at 12:19 pm

      Hint. It is the LABOUR party.

    • The Weatherman 10.2
      3 May 2017 at 12:30 pm

      Plenty of Indonesian Muslims on temporary migrant visas slaving away on NZ Farms. Iain has been fighting for better conditions for them – Bill English’s neighbours in Southland employ them on shite wages, just as English sends David Bennett in and out of the Indonesian embassy to negotiate for more (workers, not wages! of course) 🙂

      Happy to prove that, by the way. Have evidence. Also of English shaking hands with a convicted Indonesian immigration abuser.

      In fact I may have just sent that exact picture to Iain a while back.

      These guys don’t just accidentally allow wages and conditions to slip – they actively endorse conditions tantamount to slavery, and work with governments like the Indonesian government very closely to ensure they all make filthy lucre in backhands.

      Up yours, Upnorth!

      This is one battle you are not going to win.

      • john 10.2.1
        3 May 2017 at 3:50 pm

        and yet they still come…because conditions are better here, pay is better here and they know they will learn how to be successful here and take that knowledge with them.

        • WILD KATIPO 10.2.1.1
          3 May 2017 at 10:33 pm

          Then get citizenship and shoot across the ditch for better wages and living standards – despite Turnbull and his mob.

          Spoke to a young bloke from South America not so long ago who’s planning to do just that. Good luck is all I can say. Hope he does well .

    • Psycho Milt 10.3
      3 May 2017 at 3:55 pm

      What about muslim candidates?

      Hopefully none. Labour can do without stories like this in the media.

      • The Fairy Godmother 10.3.1
        3 May 2017 at 9:56 pm

        He was set up by a nasty racist reporter. He is a moderate who has done great work in the interfaith movement for years.

      • Matthew Whitehead 10.3.2
        4 May 2017 at 12:32 am

        Heh, I somehow knew once Muslims were mentioned that you’d be around, go figure.

        There’s plenty of Christian candidates, but you don’t see me asking them questions about how the bible advises people to trick people into staying slaves, or how it casually rounds pi down to three, or how catholic institutions cause deep issues with guilt, even though those are all perfectly valid criticisms.

        This is because I am happy to take their word on what they believe and why, and I feel like we should be open to reasonable answers when we ask people questions about their values. Ashraf was quite clear that while he’s irrationally attached to his holy book, he doesn’t believe stoning people is appropriate to New Zealand society. It’s not an ideal answer, but it’s good enough. Christians run around pulling a completely atheological and frankly disturbing Just World Theory gospel out of their orifices from time to time, so I think that’s rather more of a priority if we’re going to start debating how we should reform religious practice in New Zealand, particularly ones like the exclusive brethren or Destiny Church.

        I’m happy to talk about it, I have lots of ideas, but I don’t understand why you think Muslims are categorically any worse than the Christians who make up an outright majority of New Zealand, who are also largely liberal and sensible. Like all religions, they have their idiots and their (excuse the loaded term) saints.

  11. Philj 11
    3 May 2017 at 12:44 pm

    Is there any socialists, or closet neo libs in this new line up?

    • McFlock 11.1
      3 May 2017 at 12:51 pm

      Of course: anyone a given commenter likes is a good socialist, anyone a given commenter dislikes is a closet neolib 🙂

      • Ad 11.1.1
        3 May 2017 at 3:21 pm

        My friends have a coherent philosophy;
        My enemies have a psychosis.

        • McFlock 11.1.1.1
          3 May 2017 at 3:27 pm

          This intelligent and distinguished chap I never heard of has provided a thorough and well-thought-out essay/video that explains the position that you should share with me.

          This other chap is an idiot that nobody has ever heard of and their essay/video is completely wrong.

    • adam 11.2
      3 May 2017 at 1:50 pm

      Technocrat’s all they way it seems.

  12. The Weatherman 12
    3 May 2017 at 1:36 pm

    And not a scarlet cummerbund among them, thank goodness… just hanging fillets of bad ties.

  13. The Weatherman 13
    3 May 2017 at 3:36 pm

    I”m really interested in how the immigration debate has played out “on the left”.

    Are non of you internationalists?

    Because the irony is, that most of those fighting slave conditions are something along those lines…. they want fair wages for all.

    Others “on the left” seem to see it only through the lens of racism – like they’ve never read any of those reports of horrid goings on produced by the Auckland Business School or Slave Free Seas, etc….

    It just seems like the debate is not happening on the left, and that the right is taking advantage. Thoughts?

    Mike Treen talks sense…. but I don’t know if he has such a wide platform. More a strait one.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 13.1
      3 May 2017 at 3:44 pm

      Pretty much agree.

      The problem is poor employment laws and a compete lack of any sort of plan for infrastructure to cope with the rate of new arrivals.

      McFlock and Bill, for example, have argued along similar lines.

      • The Weatherman 13.1.1
        3 May 2017 at 4:58 pm

        We just can’t allow the right to make this into a racism thing… and those on the left need to be educated about the labour abuses going on.

        It just drives me crazy that even many self-described unionists don’t seem to understand fully the issues at play. I know where they are coming from…. I appreciate the sentiment… but it’s lazy and knee-jerk a lot of the time.

        Slave entry to a country (paying your dues as a slave) is worse than millionaire entry (paying your dues as a rich dude)…. but neither are very ethical ways to manage immigration.

        Lees-Galloway gets it, too (besides Treen).

        *my man crushes* lol

        Michael Field’s “the Catch” is probably the most important text for people to read, I would say. Though it is across many industries. It’s insane that it is happening…. in fact, saying it was happening three years ago you were called insane.

        Less likely than NZ spying on Japan for the US…

  14. WILD KATIPO 14
    3 May 2017 at 4:09 pm

    Not so sure I like the 50/50 male female thing , but then there’s good reason to ensure woman are not marginalized either.

    Mind you ,… I would have reservations if that contained a Shipley or a Richardson within their ranks , …

    Basically , as long as they are slowly but surely edging out the remaining neo liberals they are moving in the right direction with their selections. We only have to look at the National party and their ludicrous hypocrisies over the last 9 years to see why.

    New Right Fight – Who are the New Right?
    http://www.newrightfight.co.nz/pageA.html

    • tuppence shrewsbury 14.1
      3 May 2017 at 10:44 pm

      You are Alt-Right aren’t you? you passionately believe in an anti immigrant policy and now we can add misogyny to the list. I think the list is great. Prime looks like an excellent candidate, a true provincial parliamentarian.

    • Matthew Whitehead 14.2
      4 May 2017 at 12:43 am

      You don’t have to like it, it’s being ignored. The current list is likely to deliver four more men than women on current polling averages, if we assume Labour wins Ōhāriu but all other electorates stay the same.

      Labour has spectacularly failed on its promise to deliver gender balance in its 2017 list. It’s better than before, sure, but that’s not hard. It would either need to lose both key electorates with current polling levels, (ie. Ōhāriu and Te Tai Tokerau, which I am certain they are planning on winning) or get a complete landslide in the Party Vote in order to come out even.

  15. timeforacupoftea 15
    3 May 2017 at 5:43 pm

    I think there are to many Maori in this so called list for me.

  16. Michael who failed Civics 16
    3 May 2017 at 8:07 pm

    Labour’s 2017 list is a good one; its shows rejuvenation and better representation than the Nats’ list does. There is an electoral overhang, though, as Labour will retain most of its seats and may pick up a few: those seats will reduce the number available to list candidates, including those who fail to win seats. Labour must score at least 35% in the Party Vote, not to become government, but to become a strong opposition before making a serious bid for government in 2020. The first steps have been taken but there’s still a long way to go.

  17. WILD KATIPO 17
    3 May 2017 at 10:44 pm

    Anyways – its a Labour victory and govt after the September elections. So we can all finally relax and say goodbye to Bolgers, er Keys,… errr English’s brownshirts …

    Thatchers Britain #YoungOnes – YouTube
    Video for the young ones rick rant on thatcherism▶ 0:40

    • Michael who failed Civics 17.1
      4 May 2017 at 12:04 am

      I don’t think that will happen in 2017 – but a sensible list prepares the ground for a Labour-led government in 2020 (but then I am a hopeless optimist).

  18. Theodore 18
    3 May 2017 at 11:31 pm

    Chinese and Indians eh? What about the Dutch?

  19. Michael who failed Civics 19
    4 May 2017 at 12:05 am

    What about them? What have the Dutch ever done for us?

    • Ray 19.1
      4 May 2017 at 8:16 am

      Reported New Zealand’s existence to the rest of the world, good for those of us with white skins, not so good for the original inhabitants.

      • Michael who failed Civics 19.1.1
        5 May 2017 at 10:57 pm

        So, overall a negative then? Europeans would have found their way to A-NZ sooner or later, which they did in 1769. AFAIK, Captain Cook didn’t use Dutch charts or logs; among other things, he didn’t arrive from the west, as Tasman did.