Peters vs Carter

Written By: - Date published: 7:58 am, May 6th, 2016 - 17 comments
Categories: election 2017, winston peters - Tags: , , ,

Winston Peters and worst-ever Speaker Carter scrap a lot in Parliament. It often ends with Peters taking a walk. But he’s found a way to extract a pretty comprehensive revenge – Has Winston Peters scuppered David Carter’s chances of London High Commissioner post?

Behind-the-scenes jostling between National and NZ First may have dashed Speaker David Carter’s chances of a plum diplomatic post to London.

Carter has long been thought the frontrunner to replace current High Commissioner to Britain Sir Lockwood Smith when his term ends early next year.

But it is understood NZ First is demanding that if in a position to get National across the line for a fourth term, then it would want Carter hauled back from the London posting should he have already gained it.

That would make it difficult for the Government to award him the posting in the first place.

This is a stroke of petty evil genius by Peters. He’s already using his “kingmaker” powers – whether he actually gets them or not – whether he sides with National or not – to twist National round his little finger and to stick it to Carter.

In a speech to students at Victoria University, Peters announced the party would block any “unsuitable” political appointees and require them to return home if it held the balance of power in government. A “mainly white brorocracy” had led to “rundown politicians [being] given reward for in some cases the most dubious of services by sending them offshore – beneficiaries of some undeserved golden handshake”.

The term “brorocracy” has caused a bit of a stir.

If they roll over on over on this I wonder what else Peters can get out of the desperate Nats over the next few months?

17 comments on “Peters vs Carter ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Colonial Viper 1
    6 May 2016 at 8:31 am

    I think a “brorocracy” is about the right way to describe the gender bias which remains in some senior circles of influence and power, and it’s great that Peter’s has directly pointed it out.

  2. Ann Johns 2
    6 May 2016 at 8:33 am

    I hope that Grosser is next in line behind Carter then. That posting was a punch in the face to the people of NZ. He sold us out, signed our sovereignty away, no doubt for a few pieces of silver, now, as a reward, he lives in OUR $11 million apartment.

  3. Keith 3
    6 May 2016 at 9:26 am

    So voting NZ First means jobs for the boys might end and Key remains in power just so Winston can exact revenge. What a farce. Time NZ First packed it in, they’re idiots.

  4. Puckish Rogue 4
    6 May 2016 at 9:31 am

    Arise Sir Winston…

  5. save NZ 5
    6 May 2016 at 9:37 am

    If Winston is Kingmaker, lets hope he gets rid of TPP. We have an honest debate about pros and cons of record immigration. Being King of the wine box, he can crack down on the shams and scams and corruption and tax dodging of the .1% and corporations and dodgy politicians and public servants.

    • Puckish Rogue 5.1
      6 May 2016 at 9:49 am

      He won’t, I predict he’ll say something along the lines of having looked over the papers then go on to say that due to his work this (whatever this is) won’t happen (even though it wasn’t going to happen in the first place) and he’ll have extracted his pound (more like kilo) of flesh

      Or is that an overly cynical view of things

    • Nessalt 5.2
      6 May 2016 at 11:28 am

      lol right. because that’s what happened last time he was kingmaker?

  6. Bill 6
    6 May 2016 at 9:39 am

    End all this shite by introducing a ‘Fixed Term Parliaments Act‘

    • Puckish Rogue 6.1
      6 May 2016 at 9:52 am

      Well anything that cuts the influence of Winston and Peter has to be considered

    • alwyn 6.2
      6 May 2016 at 10:58 am

      How will this change anything that Winston wants to get up to?

      In practice John Key has given us something very close to your desires. He nominated the dates for the 2011 and 2014 elections very, very early. They were known long before any “propitious” even could be foreseen.

      The last election that fell into the snap election scenario, where a sitting PM chose a temporary state of advantage to call an early election was 2002. It didn’t actually work out to well for the PM involved as third parties swept all before them.

      How will a fixed term stop Winston disrupting things to get what he wants? If he puts a price on his support, and refuses to compromise, he will have to get it or Parliament will simply end up as a shambles.

      • Bill 6.2.1
        6 May 2016 at 11:26 am

        It stops him and others by virtue of the fact that the only relevant ‘vote of confidence’ (apart from a specific motion carried by an overwhelming percentage of parliament – details of that in the post I linked to and in the existing Act linked to from that post)) is just prior to the government being formed. The party – not a coalition of parties – that gets a 50% +1 support of confidence, forms the government.

        In all likelihood, they will be a minority government that, at least some of the time, would have to rely on talking to other parties on a case by case basis to get its programme through parliament.

        Budgets are not default ‘votes of confidence’ in a fixed term parliament. If a budget can’t get 50% + of parliament to vote for it, then the ruling party goes away and talks to other parties and makes whatever necessary changes to get the 50%+ vote…so no ‘confidence and supply’ agreements are necessary.

        Winston Peters can never (never say never? 😉 ) play silly buggers in order to extract a cabinet position. Neither could Dunne…or the Maori Party…or the Greens…or anyone. The party that receives the 50% + forms government and fills the cabinet positions. (There’s nothing to stop them offering a cabinet position to a member from another party, but there isn’t really anything to be gained by that party in having a cabinet position)

  7. Kevin 7
    6 May 2016 at 10:17 am

    Key has already shown he is prepared throw anyone under the bus to forward his political agenda so I don’t see this as any kind of impediment.

    • alwyn 7.1
      6 May 2016 at 11:03 am

      I think a more accurate way of expressing it is that Key has a masterly understanding of the realities of MMP.
      He is, after all, the first PM who came into Parliament during the MMP era. All his predecessors were imbued with FPP prejudices and their tribal mores.

  8. alwyn 8
    6 May 2016 at 12:03 pm

    Winston has been quite clever, hasn’t he?
    Carter has issued a press release saying he didn’t want the job.
    McCully says that none of the politicians were being considered.
    Cunning little Winston comes out with a demand that National mustn’t do something that they were never going to do anyway.
    Now he will claim that National fell down at his feet and obeyed his orders.
    Look at me is his call. I command the actions of the Government.

    It is almost as silly as the Green Party claiming that the insulation of houses was something they “forced” the National Government to do.
    Oh well, when you are impotent you can only pretend.

  9. Phil 9
    6 May 2016 at 12:48 pm

    In a speech to students at Victoria University, Peters announced the party would block any “unsuitable” political appointees and require them to return home if it held the balance of power in government.

    Is this even how Ambassadorial appointments made?
    Isn’t it a decision made by the Minister of Foreign Affairs?

  10. Smilin 10
    6 May 2016 at 1:25 pm

    The problem National -the solution all the opposition parties agree to form a coalition in the next election then they work thru the mechanics of it, don’t be pushed for time , a committed effort to oust National is what is needed
    National is the Problem