Last chance to vote

Written By: - Date published: 11:36 am, November 17th, 2014 - 67 comments
Categories: Andrew Little, david parker, grant robertson, labour, Nanaia Mahuta - Tags:

Andrew Little

Many of the authors of the Standard have expressed their opinions on who they think should be the next leader of the Labour Party.

Mike Smith chose David Parker.  Geoff supported Andrew Little as does Stephanie Rodgers and lprent. Bill supported Nanaia Mahuta. Ben Clark supported Grant Robertson.  Apologies if he has but I don’t think that Anthony R0bins has expressed a final opinion as yet.

I voted a while ago and I will surprise nobody by confirming that I voted Andrew Little 1 and Nanaia Mahuta 2.  The decision making process was fairly easy although Nanaia made it tougher by conducting herself in a very dignified way and by campaigning very effectively.  I was impressed by her informal campaign in 2011 with David Cunliffe and she has shown recently that this was no fluke.  There is a decency about Nanaia as well as a keen intelligence that deserves her continuing to have a senior role in the Labour Party.

Why did I vote for Andrew?

I am concerned at how Caucus has functioned over the past few years and I believe this needs to change.  Andrew impresses me as being someone who will be able to achieve this change.  His background with the EPMU and the party equip him well for what is needed to make Labour succeed.  And I have been really impressed with his performance.  He speaks with a passion and a determination that can inspire.  And he is quite unique as a politician in that his ego is small.  He is the candidate who has been in politics for the shortest period of time and the one who has the greatest potential for improvement.

My third preference went to David Parker.  My dealings with him have always been cordial and civilised.  He has a very keen mind and will be an important member of any future Labour Government.

And as a reminder …

Only Labour Party members and affiliates can vote in the election.  New members must have joined before 11.59pm Wednesday October 1 (the day after the Leadership Election was triggered).  Unfinancial members (anyone who has been a Labour Party member in the past three years and who has not paid a membership fee in 2014) must have rejoined before November 12, 2014.

Voting closes 12 noon Tuesday November 18, 2014.

If you have not received a voting form and want to update your email address you can email reception@labour.org.nz to ensure that your email address is on file.

If you have any questions, you can email the team at leadershipelection@labour.org.nz.

Edit: Bill has suggested to me that his post was a comment on who would be most able to counter the inevitable attacks from the right if all else was equal rather than a straight endorsement of Nanaia and he is right.  I missed the subtlety of what he wrote first time.  Apologies to him.

67 comments on “Last chance to vote”

  1. Tracey 1

    according to mike williams it is a lottery.

    I cant imagine hooton publicly making a statement about a leadershop contest without tapping some shoulders and insiders in the know.

    Williams needs to stop doing the rnz spot. Today he almost did, by mainly sitting listening to hooton and ryan discuss stuff.

    • mickysavage 1.1

      You can guarantee that the right has a strategy to undermine whoever is elected as leader and it will start to be rolled out at about 5 minutes after the decision is made.

      • Skinny 1.1.1

        Considering it’s 3 years till the next election it doesn’t matter what the Right-Wing has to say about the new leader. And whoever wins needs to say very little and beaver away restructuring the party so it’s fit to fight for the next election. Things like shuffling Cosgrove and others along. The formation of an offshoot party (Labour-Maori) that can win a seat and pull enough party votes, including previous non voters to bring in 2 more seats.

        Here is a new idea that I have which should get voters infused for the next election. In certain Electorate seats a primary contest amongst Labour, Greens & NZF for the right to be sole electorate candidate to go up against the National candidate. Far too many seats National have been spoilt by previously having vote splitting, a combined strategy to ‘contest’ the seat with one main cross party endorsed candidate is the way to go.

        • ghostwhowalksnz 1.1.1.1

          Oh yes it does.

          All the good work can be undone in the public perception by a well organised tory smear machine.
          Worked for them before , likely to work again.

          Im not talking about the upfront attacks , its the behind the scene deals where so called opinion leaders are hi jacked and repeat smears from Farrar and Slater and co.

          • Skinny 1.1.1.1.1

            Really unless the Left change tactics and try new ideas we are holding out on the public to want a change of Government. New thinking on our future, however the team needs refreshing, this is the problem and is why a Left bloc is the better option.

        • Clemgeopin 1.1.1.2

          What a novel idea!
          Worth investigating as to how such a n electorate seat contest could be held and in which sort of electorates it would be worth doing and if it is worth doing at all. Need to consider the pros and cons.
          Personally I think it will be worth doing so in a few marginal/crucial seats as an experiment in MMP. I also wish that the coat-tailing is removed and the threshold reduced to 4% or even better, 3%, as it will give a fairer democratic representaton to voters, such as the Conservatives and the Internet-Mana.

          • Skinny 1.1.1.2.1

            Why thanks Clem, I ran it by one of the leader contenders who thought it was a great idea and got quite animated about the possibilities.

            Marginal seats is the obvious benefit, however it could impact on a number of not so close seats by getting new voting members for all the party’s contesting the primary. The hype of such a contest would engage the electorate. You could add a number of dimensions like the candidate that wins agrees to drop from a party list in an all or nothing approach. The coalition partners could stand (do deals) talented candidates in some electorates to ensure they win seats.

      • Tracey 1.1.2

        o lay their plans. At least little has put in writing an acknowledgement of the problem

      • mac1 1.1.3

        And for that single and inevitable reason, no matter that I voted differently from whoever, and whatever the outcome, we must be seamless in our unity behind the leadership.

        Any thing else is undemocratic, divisive and intolerable.

        But mostly, useless, and counter-productive.

      • You can intuit plenty of that from the table DPF has copy-pasted into his latest …

        http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2014/11/assessing_the_labour_leadership_candidates.html

        (Warning: comments full of the usual sexist/homophobic/anti-left stuff)

      • Almost the same as you Micky ,however mine is in reverse .First Nanaia then Andrew. However rest asured who ever wins will have my full support I want to see a Labour Government before I fall of the perch and 83 im near the edge and we will only have victory if we are all and I mean all fully united , The old Socialist motto Divided we fall United we win go to it members we have a job ahead .

    • Chooky 1.2

      +100 Tracy…i think rnz should get rid of Hooton as well …they should have a DIFFERENT panel of EXPERTS on every week from both the Left and the Right

      …if they are talking about education lets have some real experts on

      ….at the moment we only hear Hooton’s spin…and with no effective opposition from Mike Williams or Kathryn Ryan …Williams is a Hooton Mini-Me

      ….and Hooton thinks he is the expert on everything ….from what is going on in education , employment law, unions, international matters …to what is wrong with the Greens, why they should be in coalition with Nactional …to what is wrong with Labour, leadership issues and David Cunliffe ( that went on for f..king ages), he talks up John Key with one or two exceptions on minor matters….

      …imo …the progamme is increasingly one of disinformation, spin, no real debate and dialogue or indepth analysis

      …..a monologue from Hooton…broadcast on NZ public radio …..increasingly nauseating

      ( sorry this rave should probably be on Open Mike)

      • tc 1.2.1

        Hooton and a complaint RNZ is part of the 2 track strategy so get used to him and DPF getting plenty of airtime.

        ‘….the progamme is increasingly one of disinformation, spin, no real debate and dialogue or indepth analysis…’ Yup working as designed for awhile now.

        • Tracey 1.2.1.1

          if they have to have it… get someone

          a. from the left
          b. who will speak for the left

          listening to hi., when he does pipes upi have no idea who williams might have voted for.

      • marie 1.2.2

        I think it’s going too far to call Mike Williams a Hooton mini-me but I have thought for some time that he no longer represents an effective alternative position. Of course, Radio NZ is willing to have extreme right wing views expressed on it’s shows all the time, Hooton, L’estrange-corbet, Graham Bell etc, etc,etc. However, as soon as someone like Bomber Bradbury expresses left wing views, he must be removed from the show forever. Of course, we can look forward to Paul Henry on radio and TV joining the other impartial media that are there at present, Hosking, Plunket, Smith and Garner to name just a few. If we can just encourage TV3 in their endeavour to water down that biased John Campbell our democracy will be truly safe.

  2. Atiawa 2

    I hope you are right. He also has great compassion for others and is able to see the good in us all. If your preference for Andrew is shared by the majority of eligible voters I believe we will have a worthy and able leader, capable of capturing the attention of voters.
    He will of course be attacked for not winning an electoral seat and for his union affiliations. Which may mean that he won’t enjoy much of a honeymoon, however I see that as a positive because once he gets his feet under the table he will build a momentum that will be hard to deny.

    • Jenny Kirk 2.1

      Its odd but I haven’t seen anyone attack Parker for not winning an electoral seat.
      Does this mean that List-only candidates are protected from this particular type of attack ? ?

      • Anne 2.1.1

        No, it means they consider Andrew Little to be more of a threat to the National Govt. than David Parker.

      • Atiawa 2.1.2

        Who Knows Jenny? All will be revealed within the next 48 hours. What I do know is Jonathan Young doubled his 2011 majority last election which is an obvious area for an attack by National. Oh, and Andrews mum is a known previous supporter of New Plymouth National candidates. Don’t believe they haven’t a script written for that as well. Of course John Key’s mum had the benefit of living in a state house kindly provided by a progressive caring Labour government. Surely she would have supported a Labour government during those times? There would not have been to many alternatives for her other than private rental’s, but would they have given little Johnny the security & continuity a state house provides? Unlikely.

        • ghostwhowalksnz 2.1.2.1

          Ever heard of electoral boundary changes, its also the main reason why Napier flipped.

          New Plymouth added a big chunk of rural area around to Opunake

          • Atiawa 2.1.2.1.1

            Insignificant Phantom.

            17% of employees in New Plymouth have their occupation listed as “manager”. (Per head of the nations working population the highest in NZ).
            The province is the “Energy” capital of the country and along with dairy farming is a major contributor to the countries GDP. Taranaki was the governments “good news” story.
            The fear of a Labour/Greens coalition put oil & gas exploration & dairy farming at risk.
            What do you think was the topic of conversation in smoko rooms in New Plymouth leading up to the general election and led by aspiring GM’s?

            • Anne 2.1.2.1.1.1

              I gather you haven’t been around politics for too many years Atiawa. gwwnz is correct. Boundary changes have turned many a safe Labour seat into a marginal seat at best. It has worked the other way around over the decades too, but strangely enough… not as often as Labour losing former safe or marginally Labour seats. Whether it was FPP or now under MMP, boundary changes have invariably favoured National. There have been several election outcomes in the past confirming it. 1978 and 1981 were two of the more obvious in recent decades where Labour scored significantly higher voting numbers than National yet lost the elections. I put it down to authoritarian/establishment/bureaucracy at work.

              And btw, John Key’s mother was an avid Labour supporter so it’s no big deal that Andrew Little’s mother is/was a National supporter. Perhaps there’s some portent in that for Andrew.

              The fear of a Labour/Greens coalition put oil & gas exploration & dairy farming at risk.

              Oh well, Dirty Politics worked well there didn’t it. Not too surprised.

              And btw, if you read the electoral rolls, you will find there are more managers than workers in the country. I could have sworn it was the other way around but never mind… 😉

              • Atiawa

                I’m just telling it the way it was/is Anne. I live in the electorate and have more face to face conversations with people then most.
                My post was about alerting anyone prepared to listen about the personal attacks AL as a possible new leader should be prepared for. If you believe his response should be about the unfairness of boundary changes and if they hadn’t occurred the result would have been different, then you and the Phantom are living in fantasyland .
                My Labour party credentials are derived from over fifty years of involvement. Along with my elder siblings we delivered pamphlets around the then Egmont electorate for John Sneddon & Dave V? who contested elections against sitting National party MP’s Bill Sheet & Venn Young. We carried the apple box from home for John Sneddon to stand on in the main street of Hawera on a Friday night to deliver many a sterling hustings speech. We helped fund raise for the Labour party and its candidates by selling raffle tickets door to door, holding crib and 500 evenings.
                Don’t “gather” that I haven’t been around politics for too many years.

                • Anne

                  If you believe his response should be about the unfairness of boundary changes and if they hadn’t occurred the result would have been different, then you and the Phantom are living in fantasyland

                  You’re indulging in a bit of fantasyland politics there Atiawa. Has Matthew Hooton been giving you lessons in the art of ‘distraction and spin?

                  • Atiawa

                    Am I missing something here?

                    Andrew Little will be the first to acknowledge that the boundary changes had negligible impact on his vote.
                    Here’s a straight forward exercise for you Anne. Look up the polling booths between Okato (South of the Stoney River) & Opunake. Add separately the total vote for JY & AL. Subtract AL ‘s vote from JY’s = the difference as a result of the boundary change. Then get back to me and let me know if that amounts to close to 4,000+ extra votes.

                    Good luck with the math. Your spin & distraction makes Hooton a novice at the art.

              • Murray Rawshark

                Back when prostitution was illegal, everyone who worked in massage parlours used to put their occupation down as manager. New Plymouth is probably about 40 years behind, and most of the people there are probably inflating their sense of importance. Anyone who mows lawns can call themselves a manager.

                • Ron

                  Was not aware prostitution was ever illegal. Soliciting was a crime as was living off immoral earnings but not prostitution as far as I can remember

                  Back when prostitution was illegal

                  • Murray Rawshark

                    It was an illogical legal situation, where it wasn’t a crime to sell sex, as long as you didn’t make any money off it. The undercover cops who plagued massage parlours certainly didn’t think it was legal. The funny thing about them is that they were famous for keeping their watches on in the rooms, so they never had much success.

      • Pat O'Dea 2.1.3

        Its odd but I haven’t seen anyone attack Parker for not winning an electoral seat.

        Not really…. Although David Parker is also a list MP, he is the darling of the Right.

        As if to make the point; This morning Stuff.co.nz in an extraordinary piece, has not missed ‘The last chance’ to put the boot in to Little.

        http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/63293210/Noon-showdown-for-Labour-Party

        • Pat O'Dea 2.1.3.1

          “Unwanted by New PLYMOUTH voters….”
          ‘Unwanted’

          “The two-time failed NEW PLYMOUTH candidate….”
          ‘Double failure’

          “Should Little WIN the leadership, it will be the remarkable revival of a political CAREER nearly dealt a mortal blow in September…..”
          ‘Moribund’

          “After being soundly beaten by National’s Johnathon Young…”
          ‘Beaten’

          “he only just scraped into Parliament…”
          ‘Scraped In’

          “after waiting a humiliating two weeks for the special votes to be counted…”
          ‘Humiliated’

          Dirty politics could not have succeeded without dirty journalism.

          So now that the media has got their attack line sorted, can we expect this bile to be regurgitated at us for the next three years?

    • Cave Johnson 2.2

      And so it begins – the Herald online front page this morning “Unwanted by Taranaki voters, could Andrew Little be the next Labour leader?”

      • Cave Johnson 2.2.1

        Interesting – the pissy article in the Herald appeared at 5am. It was still there at 6.40am, but I went back at 7.20am to make a comment on it, only to find the story gone.

  3. Bill 3

    Mickey, I put up a theoretical post suggesting that if we considered all things to be equal (which they aren’t), that Nanaia would be the better choice. Not entirely sure how you interpreted that post as me supporting her to be the next leader of Labour. Anyhoe…

  4. Pat O'Dea 4

    Biology and politics may have something in common.

    Gause’s law, is a proposition that states that two species competing for the same resource cannot coexist at constant population values, if other ecological factors remain constant. When one species has even the slightest advantage or edge over another then the one with the advantage will dominate in the long term.

    Competitive exclusion principle (biology)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competitive_exclusion_principle

    The feuding over the past two years inside the Labour Party are proof positive that two distinct idealogical streams cannot exist in the same political party (niche) one or the other will become dominant.

    Which ever personality wins the leadership, will we be able to determine which species will have dominence inside the Labour Party for the medium to long term?

    Can David Parker and David Cunliffe both hold senior roles in same shadow cabinet?

    unlikely

    So whoever is demoted between these two, will give a clue to which faction has dominance.

    • ghostwhowalksnz 4.1

      What a load of rubbish.

      • Pat O'Dea 4.1.1

        All I am saying is that if Parker is in the shadow cabinet and Cunliffe is completely out, this will represent total accross the board victory for the ABC faction.

        I suppose the question is, will this result put an end to the factional infighting.

        • Ron 4.1.1.1

          I still think DC will depart sometime in next year. The party has made it pretty plain they don’t want him so why kick against the pricks, to quote scripture.

  5. Chooky 5

    I personally think Mahuta has it in her to be a great Labour Prime Minister!

    …and I think she would be a winner for Labour because of who she is and her ability to appeal to women and the old traditional Labour voter…now often unemployed or on zero contracts and struggling

    …..however I would be happy with Little as leader ( and Mahuta as a co-leader…this would really sock it to John Key and Nactional…they could only muster Bennett as a co- leader …or Collins)

    • Kiwiri - Raided of the Last Shark 5.1

      I did a quick search for the year the candidates were born. Quite revealing.

      ‘New generation’ Grant is a year younger than Nanaia (welcome aboard, Nanaia).

      And Grant is only six years younger than Andrew Little, and about eleven years younger than David Parker.

  6. b waghorn 6

    Another plus for little in my view is his name has popped up quietly as a future labour leader from time to time for at least 4 or 5 years and if I’ve noticed it I’m sure plenty of others have

  7. millsy 7

    It needs to be remembered though, regardless of who wins tomorrow, the next election will be won or lost at the new leader’s first Parliament question time.

    • KJS0ne 7.1

      I hope that’s firmly tongue in cheek.

      • millsy 7.1.1

        No. It is serious. The new leader needs to do well in Question Time first off. If he/she fluffs its, then John Key will capitalise. It’s like a one day cricket match. You lose 2 or 3 wickets in the first over then you will struggle throughout the match. Especially against an opponent with a good track record.

        • Liberal Realist 7.1.1.1

          Bang on! The MSM vultures will be circling the house.

          Should the new leader screw up an any way (I mean ANY) you watch the narrative framing commence.

  8. alwyn 8

    If one is to believe Ipredict it is all over.
    They currently have Little at 0.87, and rising, Robertson at 0.13 (falling), Parker at 0.01 (falling) and no sign of Mahuta at all.
    When will the official result be announced, and the payout made?

    • Phil 8.1

      f one is to believe Ipredict it is all over.
      They currently have Little at 0.87, and rising

      No-one should be surprised by this. The caucus hasn’t coalesced around a single contender, the membership appears equally split, while the Unions are backing their man.

      • Colonial Rawshark 8.1.1

        I think the results tomorrow will show that the members are definitely not equally split. My pick – that there are two quite strong contenders that the membership favours ~neck and neck. And two noticeably weaker contenders.

        • weka 8.1.1.1

          Is that Little and Robertson as the strong contenders?

          • Colonial Rawshark 8.1.1.1.1

            I reckon so, although in my heart I’d love the top two membership picks to be AL and NM.

        • alwyn 8.1.1.2

          You deserve to be congratulated for this prediction.
          Absolutely spot on as far as the results went. I believe the horse-racing parlance is that Little got there “on the nod”.
          Would you like to tell me Saturday’s winning Lotto numbers?

  9. Tracey 9

    i note on rnz nine to noon when ryan describes ipredict as hootons he never corrects her. is he back financially interested?

  10. Brownie 10

    Sorry to ask this question but can you really see a statesmen like PM in the four contenders. I think we are in real trouble for 2017 and everyone seems in denial . The Labour vote was lost by working man and to quote Shane Jones a gaggle of unionists and gays won’t get them back.

    • Chooky 10.1

      well Shane Jones was hardly “statesmen like”!…and nor is Key ( he is only PM because of the dirty tricks and spinners and an acquiescent msm )

      …and yes I can see both Mahuta and Little being a statesmen like Prime Minister for New Zealand

    • Jenny Kirk 10.2

      You’ve misquoted Brownie – those are Damien O’Connors words

  11. AmaKiwi 11

    The NZ Herald endorses Grant Robertson.

    Sorry, Grant. With that endorsement I’ll have to put you at #4.

  12. paddy 12

    If Grant Robertson wins then its all over Rover. We would be in permanent opposition. Little is the only candidate who gives us a decent chance in 2017.

  13. northshoreguynz 13

    1. Little, seems like the only one who can sort out the caucus, and unite the broader left.
    2. Mahuta, mana
    3.Parker, too dry
    4. Robertson, a career rat

Recent Comments

Recent Posts