Principled stands from Little

153 comments on “Principled stands from Little ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Craig Glen Eden 1

   17 February 2015 at 9:30 am

   Andrews doing a good job and I think that its his demeanour as well as what he says that kiwis are relating to. Cutting the crap has been a very good approach.
   • Anno1701 1.1

     17 February 2015 at 2:22 pm

     Take those glasses of and i reckon he would look like a proper brawler !

     just needs a nice flat cap 😉
2. Dorothy 2

   17 February 2015 at 9:36 am

   Honesty verses spin should always win.
3. Tautoko Mangō Mata 3

   17 February 2015 at 9:39 am

   I agree and if he comes out strongly denouncing ISDS then I will kiss his feet!
   How can you raise a minimum wage with an ISDS?
   • Veolia, the giant French-based transportation company, is suing Egypt for raising its minimum wage, which would mean higher pay for workers at the Alexandria bus company it owns and thus lower profits. ”
   http://www.huffingtonpost.com/larry-cohen
   • thatguynz 3.1

     17 February 2015 at 9:45 am

     Shush TMM – that won’t fit with Dr Mapp’s narrative at all! That just won’t do 🙂
     • vto 3.1.1

       17 February 2015 at 10:20 am

       Yeah, where is Wayne on this?

       The wealth our community generates needs spreading around, not concentrating. And this does not fit with the TPP.

       The TPP is fucked in the head.

       And the TPP will fuck us in the head – like same provisions are fucking Egypt, fucking the Canadians, fucking the aussies.
       • Tracey 3.1.1.1

         17 February 2015 at 10:37 am

         Nice…

         i am sure he will say that is different. And that the usual suspects are the only ones not wanting a TPP cos they object to ALL free trade agreements. And will dodge that he and his ilk have agreed with every single FTA but that apparently doesn’t dent his credibility.

         He did say yesterday that he doesn’t post to address our questions but for the benefit of those who read but don’t post. So he is kind of an advertisement (without a disclaimer)
   • Wayne 3.2

     17 February 2015 at 10:43 am

     But the negotiating parties to TPP will not agree to an ISDS that would prevent minimum wage increases, including the US itself.
     • Tracey 3.2.1

       17 February 2015 at 10:45 am

       On what basis? Can you tell us everything that won’t be agreed to, and everything that will and how you know? Thanks in advance
       • One Anonymous Bloke 3.2.1.1

         17 February 2015 at 11:04 am

         He’s already answered that: it’s his informed opinion. I suspect he may know something of the bottom lines laid down by Lab5.

         Dr. Mapp, can you say whether said bottom lines have changed at all since the 2008 election?
     • vto 3.2.2

       17 February 2015 at 10:58 am

       Wayne the TPP is structurally flawed.

       Plus you keep refusing to answer questions on it, instead constantly bemoaning the “usual suspects” aka Key and cronies.

       Your credibility is draining fast and there aint much left.
   • Michael 3.3

     17 February 2015 at 11:53 am

     I believe he already did. http://ruminator.co.nz/no-bullshit-andrew-little/

     “The most surprising opinion I got out of him was his 95 per cent-of-the-way refusal to support the TPPA (read here for Hadyn Green’s superb explanation of why it’s shit). This is in stark contrast with previous Labour leaders who have prevaricated over their stance. Oh they might hate it, but they might like it you know. They just weren’t sure. Not with Andrew. Andrew’s position was “I can’t see myself supporting an agreement that gives away sovereign authority.” His concerns were threefold: that the Investor State Dispute Settlement aspect would be too dangerous, that we would be handing over domestic control of our State Owned Entities to a trade agreement,and that the troubling IP provisions would do harm to things like our patent law and undermine the efficacy of Pharmac.”

     Pretty principled stand if you ask me.
   • saveNZ 3.4

     17 February 2015 at 10:06 pm

     +1
4. Skinny 4

   17 February 2015 at 9:43 am

   Andrew is getting across some solid sound & visual bites. The kiwi public can see this guy is the real deal as a future leader of New Zealand. It would be fair to say he is keeping some of us in there supporting Labour ‘just’. I know Goff is off, however there are a lot more hangers on that need to call their political careers to an end. And ffs the LP need to cull out any neo liberal want to be MP’s floating around.
   • alwyn 4.1

     17 February 2015 at 12:52 pm

     When is Goff off? Is he going to retire or does he still have delusions of being good at something?
     What do you know that he isn’t telling the public?
     • DS 4.1.1

       17 February 2015 at 1:30 pm

       I think Goff wants to be the first person to be a cabinet minister in three Labour Governments.
       • alwyn 4.1.1.1

         17 February 2015 at 2:35 pm

         God help us.
         Actually I’d give Annette King a better chance.
   • Saarbo 4.2

     17 February 2015 at 9:31 pm

     +1.
5. TheContrarian 5

   17 February 2015 at 9:44 am

   My uncle, a Key voter, said to me last night that he was really warming to Little and thought he was doing a fantastic job so far.
6. Ffloyd 6

   17 February 2015 at 9:44 am

   Was listening to Whineon this morning trying to push A L into saying what He wanted him to say. It was like herding cats and the cats won. Little has him on toast. He is a very safe pair of hands with no ego driven baggage. Yay!
   • alwyn 6.1

     17 February 2015 at 10:42 am

     Really? I didn’t realise he had two interviews this morning.
     In the one I heard, where he was being questioned about the approach we should take to ISIS, he was so confused and rambling that he made Steffan Browning advocating homeopathy as a treatment for Ebola sound lucid and intelligent.
     What was the other interview you heard where you say he did better?
     • Sans Cle 6.1.1

       17 February 2015 at 10:58 am

       Interesting what we take from the same thing we hear!
       I heard an aggressive questioning tack from Espiner (typical of his approach to those he doesn’t agree with politically), asking questions and subsequently not listening to the answer that Little gave. Little had to repeat it (two or three times) about what was discussed at the meeting, with the Iraqi foreign minister) – which was broader than military assistance, and included humanitarian assistance and rebuilding businesses. The title of the audio clip is “Labour continues to oppose NZ involvement in anti-IS coalition”. This is misleading, from what I heard. Little did not oppose all involvement – he opposed use of NZ’s military in Iraq. Espiner was trying to put words in Little’s mouth, and also did not take that the message that Little took from the Ibrahim al-Ja’afari meeting, (Espiner was not at this meeting, but claimed to know that all he asked for was military help!).
       I thought Little was very clear, articulate and showed Espiner up for all his political biases which he brings to his interviews.
       • greywarshark 6.1.1.1

         17 February 2015 at 4:37 pm

         @ Sans Cle
         I have noticed Espiner behaving in dogged determination, virtually holding onto the interviewee and berating him/her on whether it is true that he wears socks in different colours! Well that’s a barefaced lie actually, but you get the idea. I have been told that the release method in serious cases of lockjaw is to turn a high-pressure hose on them. I don’t understand this. I can’t see it working in a high-tech sound booth.
         • left for deadshark 6.1.1.1.1

           17 February 2015 at 10:31 pm

           Finger up the arse,at lest that works for other dogs,no offence to the four legged ones.
     • Ffloyd 6.1.2

       17 February 2015 at 4:03 pm

       Really Alvin! I was listening to g.espiner on Nat Radio. I don’t know which station you were listening to. *Planet Key Lies and Misinformation* perhaps.
7. Anne 7

   17 February 2015 at 9:46 am

   I remember years ago when it was first publicly mooted he was considering a career in politics he was seen by many (including journos) as a ‘future Labour leader’. When he first entered parliament in 2011 he was cast by some in the role of the ‘Labour leader in waiting’. Now it’s time to cast him in the role of ‘Prime Minister in waiting’.

   2017 can’t come fast enough.
   • Stuart Munro 7.1

     17 February 2015 at 12:16 pm

     Don’t wish your life away – shonky jonky doesn’t like being booed – scrag the s.o.b. a few times and he’ll probably piss off – and not before time.
8. Peter Wilson 8

   17 February 2015 at 9:50 am

   The best first-preference vote I ever made. I’m also pleased how quickly die-hard Robertson supporters have come around to Little, it shows that the divisions within the party are healing, primarily based on performance. We can start to smile again 🙂
   • lprent 8.1

     17 February 2015 at 10:46 am

     Xmas break. No real time for the Labour caucus to break out.

     Lets chill out until May or June and see if we get that senior Labour MP or senior Labour party figure disease starts arising again.

     But yes, it does look better. Also the Labour spokespeople appear to have started working on their areas again post xmas. That tends to indicate that they feel that they have room to do so. Implies less of an armed camp between the staffers.
     • Peter Wilson 8.1.1

       17 February 2015 at 4:24 pm

       I can only hope so. I think we’ll get a year of peace or so until de/selection season begins.
9. The Murphey 9

   17 February 2015 at 10:00 am

   Q. If Andrew does not openly confront the mirage of New Zealand’s ‘foreign debt’ and the deception behind it how can he be referred to as ‘principled’ ?
   • One Anonymous Bloke 9.1

     17 February 2015 at 10:01 am

     Easy: by not playing passive aggressive twenty questions pantomimes.

     PS: plus, you’re full of shit: Little has openly confronted the foreign debt issue. Perhaps you were too busy to check.
     • The Murphey 9.1.1

       17 February 2015 at 10:13 am

       You have not understood my question be it deliberately or because ‘reading and comprehension is a skill’ as you like to point out to others

       Q. If he has addressed the issue as you claim then why could you not post a citation along with your insults ?
       • One Anonymous Bloke 9.1.1.1

         17 February 2015 at 10:17 am

         It’s up to you to verify it. Pretty stupid, to make a claim that Little hasn’t discussed foreign debt before reading any of his speeches, eh.
         • The Murphey 9.1.1.1.1

           17 February 2015 at 10:22 am

           ‘Reading and comprehension is a skill’

           Little has not ‘openly confronted the mirage of New Zealand’s ‘foreign debt’ and the deception behind it’
           • One Anonymous Bloke 9.1.1.1.1.1

             17 February 2015 at 10:28 am

             When will you stop beating your wife?
             • McFlock …

               17 February 2015 at 11:19 am

               lol

               smurfey doesn’t even know the difference between an exception to a rule and someone who’s exceptional. Reading and comprehension is a skill that they are not familiar with.
               • The Murphey …

                 17 February 2015 at 11:55 am

                 Q. What was it about the ‘wife beating’ comment that you found entertaining ?

                 [lprent: Your political education either needs enhancing or you are trying to be fuckwit commenter. Either way I will eventually wind up banning you if you continue down this path. You are acting like one of the moronic ACToid who went through their damned training course and follow it religiously and without perceptible thought. This is your only warning.

                 You used a “Loaded question“. This is also known as the pigfucker technique around here as in “when did you last fuck your pig”, because whichever way you answer you lose. The most common defence is derision by those who see it and a stupid flamewar as they deride. I typically walk back to find the dickhead who used one of the stupid troll techniques and I blame the whole of the silly flame entirely on them. In this case that would be you

                 If I see you try this particular technique again in any shape or form, I may start with a 4 month ban, or it could just be a week. Which do you prefer. That is my version of a pigfucker question. Of course you could protest, but generally I just double whatever ban I impose. I don’t like pigfuckers. ]
                 • One Anonymous Bloke …

                   17 February 2015 at 11:59 am

                   *sigh*

                   Cluebat.
                   • The Murphey …

                     17 February 2015 at 12:11 pm

                     Beautiful use of words OAB through which you have exposed a number of commentators double standards and hypocrisy most notably those who would regularly leap all over such a comment

                     Your attempt to wash away the stain seeks only to further provide insight into the space between your ears

                     Congratulations you achieved the explicit appreciation of McFlock
                   • McFlock …

                     17 February 2015 at 12:13 pm

                     you’re a legend in your own mind, smurph
                   • One Anonymous Bloke …

                     17 February 2015 at 12:20 pm

                     I am sorry for anyone who’s offended by my comment 😈
                   • lprent []

                     17 February 2015 at 12:50 pm

                     I’m not sure this is the place to paraphrase Brownlee…
                 • McFlock …

                   17 February 2015 at 11:59 am

                   Q. Do you really need someone to explain it to you?
                 • The Murphey …

                   17 February 2015 at 7:02 pm

                   @ Lprent

                   The original question was in context of the article theme so I presume you were not referring to it

                   I took OABs ‘ beating’ comment at face value as I have no context in which to place it least of all politically

                   Q. Perhaps you might like to provide the context ?

                   I have not heard the bestiality terminology you used in context of posting comments but it is ugly language on ugly language regardless of context or otherwise

                   That you seemingly encourage and endorse the use of human and animal abusive commentary and terminology is distasteful but each to their own if that’s the image you wish to portray
                   • One Anonymous Bloke …

                     17 February 2015 at 7:10 pm

                     If you can’t see how your original comment is a leading question, no wonder you have delusions of political insight.
                   • te reo putake …

                     17 February 2015 at 7:19 pm

                     “I took OABs ‘ beating’ comment at face value as I have no context in which to place it least of all politically …”

                     Seriously? You’re that new to politics you’ve never heard the phrase? Ask one of the other interns or have a read here:

                     http://www.mrmediatraining.com/2011/09/19/when-did-you-stop-beating-your-wife/

                     Then there’s this: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002579626
                   • The Murphey …

                     17 February 2015 at 7:19 pm

                     That is your interpretation

                     The question is on theme relevant and despite your multiple attempts remains unanswered

                     Edit: TRP I have no context such as Lprent has assumed
                     The language is ugly and highlights myriad of double standards through its use and support
                   • One Anonymous Bloke …

                     17 February 2015 at 7:24 pm

                     remains unanswered

                     Ahh! The stupid, it burns!
                   • One Anonymous Bloke …

                     17 February 2015 at 7:35 pm

                     …the language is ugly…

                     Stop mangling it then.
                   • The Murphey …

                     17 February 2015 at 7:39 pm

                     You offered what you believed was an answer which of course it was not OAB

                     You then used ugly language to which I have no context and are atrempting to project wildly onto me which is a weak tactic used frequently on this site by yourself and others

                     If you’re comfortable with the response that’s ok for you but I’m telling you that it was vacuous and irrelevant for me

                     The ‘stupid’ victory you’re attemping to claim is due to self inflation
                   • One Anonymous Bloke …

                     17 February 2015 at 7:42 pm

                     Ahh! Burning! You loaded the answer into the question, hence the term ‘loaded question’.

                     There isn’t much TRP or McFlock or Lprent or I can say to you that will help you understand that.

                     You have to grasp it for yourself.
                   • The Murphey …

                     17 February 2015 at 7:57 pm

                     Based on direct and indirect observations of yourself TRP McFlock and Lprent on this site there is nothing you can or should attempt to teach anyone with attitude such as you exhibit

                     How not to conduct yourself would be the obvious aside

                     It’s patently not online personas so best of luck with lifes learnings
                   • te reo putake …

                     17 February 2015 at 8:16 pm

                     I think The Murphey’s random comment generator may be shorting out.
                   • Clemgeopin …

                     17 February 2015 at 8:31 pm

                     @The Murphey: Anyway, tell us, when did you stop….Oh, ok, never mind. Forget it… As you were.
                   • McFlock …

                     17 February 2015 at 9:24 pm

                     to heck with when they stopped beating their wife, when did the murphey start erasing their entire memory before reading a comment?
10. Sirenia 10

    17 February 2015 at 10:09 am

    Just needs to articulate his words better (eg clearer consonants) and ensure better cell phone connections when interviewed. Sometimes hard to hear what he is saying as he has a soft voice.
    • Anne 10.1

      17 February 2015 at 10:31 am

      +1
      Re- better cell phone connections. One morning last week on RNZ he was impossible to understand the connection (or was it the cell phone) was so awful.
      • ghostwhowalksnz 10.1.1

        17 February 2015 at 11:33 am

        he needs to get a high quality microphone kit to connect to the cellphone
        • Tom Jackson 10.1.1.1

          17 February 2015 at 12:27 pm

          Let’s buy him a Turtle Beach gamer’s headset. He would look boss wearing that everywhere!
          • phillip ure 10.1.1.1.1

            17 February 2015 at 4:30 pm

            heh..!
      • alwyn 10.1.2

        17 February 2015 at 12:57 pm

        “One morning last week on RNZ he was impossible to understand’

        I don’t think it had anything to do with the phone.
        He is normally impossible to understand. Clarity of thought and exposition doesn’t really exist in Little’s world.
11. Puckish Rogue 11

    17 February 2015 at 10:14 am

    Thought you guys would have learned by now about building up your leaders only to see them fall…
    • One Anonymous Bloke 11.1

      17 February 2015 at 10:19 am

      You might want to have a word with Fisiani about that. You know, put your own house in order before you go pointing fingers, Team Key.
      • Puckish Rogue 11.1.1

        17 February 2015 at 2:22 pm

        Well six years and counting in power tends to do that, we’ll see how little goes
        • One Anonymous Bloke 11.1.1.1

          17 February 2015 at 4:02 pm

          An authoritarian follower tends to do that. FIFY
          • Draco T Bastard 11.1.1.1.1

            17 February 2015 at 7:59 pm

            +11111
        • Murray Rawshark 11.1.1.2

          17 February 2015 at 7:44 pm

          Counting what, Pukish? The number of MPs who’ve had to resign? That “do you know who I am” idiot abused a waiter. Who did the others abuse? Count the victims of NAct MPs.
    • rawshark-yeshe 11.2

      17 February 2015 at 10:23 am

      Wow puckish .. never thought I would ever read you writing like this about Key and his followers .. marvelous for you !! 😀
      • Puckish Rogue 11.2.1

        17 February 2015 at 4:13 pm

        Yeah you do know Keys been in power for six years and Littles been leader of the muppets sorry Labour for a couple of months but no really go on, reminds of the talk of Cunliffe, Shearer, Goff…
    • tricledrown 11.3

      17 February 2015 at 10:35 am

      flailing PR Scraping the bottom of the barrel again.
      • tricledrown 11.3.1

        17 February 2015 at 10:42 am

        Poor PR those biscuits must be pretty rancid by now.
        • Puckish Rogue 11.3.1.1

          17 February 2015 at 4:17 pm

          Six years of Key and likely three still to come means things are looking pretty good
          • Heather 11.3.1.1.1

            17 February 2015 at 9:04 pm

            You really have to be joking?
12. dave brown 12

    17 February 2015 at 10:55 am

    Have to dissaggree with ROb.
    The two examples of standing on PRINCIPLES are terrible.

    They are the wrong principles.

    The SkyCity ‘principle’ is that SkyCity can go ahead with its corrupt deal done with the NACTs including its extra pokies, providing it builds a giant white elephant as per the deal.

    That principle is no more than enforcing the NACTs principle to do corrupt deals with its cronies.

    The anti-IS principle is that its OK to go to a US led war on terror, except that in NZs case we don’t have the planes and are too small to make a difference in ‘training’ to act on that principle.

    The principle is that this war is justified, only NZ doesn’t have the capacity to play an effective role.

    If the war is justified what is stopping Labour from calling for more planes and a bigger SAS ‘training’ squad?

    A principle?
    • One Anonymous Bloke 12.1

      17 February 2015 at 11:01 am

      I think you’re confusing “principles” with ‘my principles’.

      Re: ISIS, Little is articulating the principle that ineffective action is pointless.

      Re: Sky City, he’s saying they have to abide by the contract and so does the government (more or less).
      • dave brown 12.1.1

        17 February 2015 at 11:14 am

        No I’m saying clearly that Little’s principles do not differ significantly from NACTs principles.

        The War is OK.
        The Skycity deal is OK.

        And that they differ from my principles.
        The War is NOT OK
        The Skycity deal is NOT OK.
        • One Anonymous Bloke 12.1.1.1

          17 February 2015 at 11:55 am

          “The Sky deal is OK”?

          Labour leader Andrew Little says SkyCity shouldn’t expect any compensation should a future Labour-led Government renege on the convention centre deal struck by the current Government…If construction has started, we certainly don’t intend to go back on it…

          3News

          Certainly leaves the possibility open that if construction hasn’t started, it won’t.
          • Colonial Rawshark 12.1.1.1.1

            17 February 2015 at 12:22 pm

            Geeezus mate, putting in a fence post would means that construction has “started.”
            • One Anonymous Bloke 12.1.1.1.1.1

              17 February 2015 at 12:26 pm

              You’d have to wonder whether Lab6 might say that Little was talking about substantial construction before pulling it out. They might not. You’re a party member, though, so I guess you’d know more about that than I.
13. les 13

    17 February 2015 at 11:04 am

    the principles of modern politics are expediency..Groucho said it best…’if you don’t like my principles….I have…others’!
14. JanMeyer 14

    17 February 2015 at 11:16 am

    Not sure I agree with the assertion that Little is adopting a “principled stand” on IS. He supports the air strikes (and by definition the inevitable collateral killing of innocents) and even implies that if we had our own “air strike capability” we might do some bombing too! But he wouldn’t be prepared to take the risk of accepting the Iraqi government request for New Zealand to help train its troops … I’m confused at the “principle” involved here.
    • Sable 14.1

      17 February 2015 at 11:36 am

      Its not really a renunciation of the US action. Its amazing how spineless this nations politicians are in standing up to the US. Iceland is a tiny speck in the ocean with no army and they have repeatedly told the US to get lost. What the hell is our excuse for the on going toadying?
      • One Anonymous Bloke 14.1.1

        17 February 2015 at 12:24 pm

        In fact, Lab5 followed the principle that they would act according to UN mandates. I haven’t heard this has changed, and I think someone here would have mentioned it.

        The National Party does what its owners tell it to.
    • ghostwhowalksnz 14.2

      17 February 2015 at 11:39 am

      Because the Iraqis are not prepared to fight for their corrupt sectarian government in Baghdad, training is not the way to go.

      Not that were are set up to do it properly anyway, different culture, language and reality that airstrikes are only way to defeat ISIS ‘right now’. Cant wait for ‘next year’.
    • One Anonymous Bloke 14.3

      17 February 2015 at 12:14 pm

      Going onto that battlefield without air support would not be a smart move.

      Given the Iraqi army’s serious issues with ineffectiveness, corruption, sectarianism, and human rights violations—despite over $25 billion worth of American support over the past 10 years—why is a token effort worth risking Kiwi lives?

      Andrew Little.
      • Murray Rawshark 14.3.1

        17 February 2015 at 2:49 pm

        That’s not a stand on principle. That’s saying we want some new toys before we’ll play. The principled bit is whether we go or not. Mine say no.

        He’s a bit better on Sly City, but again is basically NAct lite. I hope his position firms up.
        • One Anonymous Bloke 14.3.1.1

          17 February 2015 at 3:18 pm

          I don’t see how it can be interpreted as a desire for new toys: Little’s talking about the Iraqi Army.

          It isn’t very far from Pascal’s Bookie’s comments, such as this one:

          You need to make a case that this war will achieve good results. I’ve not seen such a case, and remain open to persuasion.
    • English Breakfast 14.4

      18 February 2015 at 8:22 am

      I’ll explain it for you. Since the 2008 election, Labour and it’s mouthpieces have claimed each of (in order) Goff, Sharer and Cunliffe were ‘game changers’, and that the subsequent election would be won in a landslide. Now it’s Andrew Little’s turn to be anointed. A more prudent stand would be to wait and see, rather than declare the man a saint. And perhaps reminding him to pay his bills might also help!
15. Clemgeopin 15

    17 February 2015 at 11:19 am

    A cartoon about Sky City trumping the two foolish clowns, Key and Joyce.

    http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/20158/cartoo1.jpg
16. Sable 16

    17 February 2015 at 11:29 am

    Maybe if it finds some genuine Labour policy to match its leader Labour might actually get somewhere but don’t hold your breath.
17. The Murphey 17

    17 February 2015 at 11:33 am

    Q. Mass surveillance endorsement should be interpreted as principled ?
    • Sable 17.1

      17 February 2015 at 11:37 am

      It was Clarke who started that ball rolling and Keys simply made it ten times worse. Labour and National can not be trusted.
      • The Murphey 17.1.1

        17 February 2015 at 11:48 am

        800k+ voters have turned thier back on the system consciously or otherwise and they won’t be returning to the booths

        The system is not for changing so another million turning their back would be encouraging
18. adam 18

    17 February 2015 at 11:47 am

    Normally I don’t comment on Labour party posts here at the standard.

    But, Anthony I disagree, and I’m sure others on the left disagree

    “It’s looking more and more like Labour has found the right leader at last. And that’s good news no matter where you sit on the political Left!”

    I care little for the neo-libearl party called labour – and don’t think it is a left wing party. It has left wing people in it – but it’s not a left wing party. So Mr Little doing well or not doing well is not something I see as good news. If the labour party gave up on liberal economics then I would embrace what you said. But as it stands, it’s just another liberal apologist talking the same neo-liberal crap which destroys working peoples lives.

    People like you Anthony. Other people see labour for what it is – a sick twisted old man – who feeds the elites like the good little lackey they are. Nothing Mr Little said is truly inspiring, liberating, or grand. If the left take such delight from so little – no wonder the Tory Scum can do as they please.
    • Psycho Milt 18.1

      17 February 2015 at 12:00 pm

      This “neoliberal” bullshit is about as useful as the Kiwiblog nutters calling everything left of ACT “socialist.”
      • Colonial Rawshark 18.1.1

        17 February 2015 at 12:27 pm

        Neoliberalism is fairly easily defined – a right wing agenda to separate economics from politics, and to place all major economic decisions in the hands of technocrats who have a belief in the virtues of the free market, advantaging capital/corporates over labour, and removing government from playing any significant role from the economy.
        • Psycho Milt 18.1.1.1

          17 February 2015 at 12:52 pm

          Socialism is also fairly easily defined, but that doesn’t make it any less annoying when people use the term to refer to things that obviously aren’t socialist. Likewise, the Labour Party, however numerous its faults, doesn’t plan on separating economics from politics, advantaging capitalists over labour, or removing government from playing any significant role in the economy, so let’s stop waving the term “neoliberal” about as though it meant nothing more than “stuff I don’t like.”
          • English Breakfast 18.1.1.1.1

            18 February 2015 at 8:18 am

            Well said. The expression ‘neo-liberal’ has become a mindless tag for the left to attach to anyone they don’t like or understand so they don’t have to engage in meaningful debate.
      • adam 18.1.2

        17 February 2015 at 12:47 pm

        For you Psych Milt – just add “liberal economic theory” where you see neo-liberal. Clear it up for you? Make it simpler? Or are you just having a bad day?
      • DoublePlusGood 18.1.3

        17 February 2015 at 12:55 pm

        It’s pretty clear that Labour’s policies are consistent with that of a centre-right party advocating things like state-owned enterprises and orthodox monetary policy, and being comfortable with the health and education systems being partly private, welfare being at subsistence living standard, and trying market solutions for issues like housing.
        I don’t see too much in the way of left policies like UBI, a redistributive tax system, actually free health and education, pacifism, etc.
    • Macro 18.2

      17 February 2015 at 12:59 pm

      If the left take such delight from so little – no wonder the Tory Scum can do as they please.

      QFT
    • DS 18.3

      17 February 2015 at 1:38 pm

      It’s a sick twisted old man who also happens to be the only thing that can defeat the New Zealand National Party.
    • Murray Rawshark 18.4

      17 February 2015 at 2:54 pm

      +1 adam. We can, and must do better. The left wing people in Labour need to raise their voice. I’ll support them from further left. They look better than they did under Shearer, but that was a real low point.
      • Chooky 18.4.1

        17 February 2015 at 10:03 pm

        +100…Shearer was “real low point”….what does that say about Little’s choice of Shearer for the spy review ? ( excluding the Greens and NZF input)

        principled ? …NAH!…
        intelligent.?…NAH!!

        ….but John Key applauded it ( say no more)

        Bradbury is succinct….(but I disagree with his last sentence)

        http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2015/02/17/labour-cut-greens-nose-off-despite-mass-surveillance-face/
        • Colonial Rawshark 18.4.1.1

          17 February 2015 at 10:12 pm

          Shearer is fully tied into the conventional and orthodox security and intelligence arrangements that NZ has in place with our allies. With him, you can count on business as usual.
        • Murray Rawshark 18.4.1.2

          18 February 2015 at 10:20 am

          The last sentence is just crap. Bomber on his little ego trip again. Any of his readers who actually have a look over here will see that heaps of us criticise Labour.
19. Sacha 19

    17 February 2015 at 12:01 pm

    I’d love to hear what prinicples are behind this decision:
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/66278519/Governments-spy-review-deal-angers-Greens
    • Chooky 19.1

      17 February 2015 at 12:18 pm

      +100 Sacha

      While Little is looking good on some issues at the moment … I am very disappointed Little hasn’t included the Greens in the review of the spying agencies….the Greens have long experience ( much longer and much better than Shearer’s patchy career in parliament) …and they have form on this issue in parliament as does Winston Peters

      …. it is a BIG mistake not to include them…..and does not bode well for future coalition deals …Labour can not go it alone..it is arrogant to think that they can and they will fail yet again
      • Sacha 19.1.1

        17 February 2015 at 1:39 pm

        Seeing tweets from gallery now saying Little has actually broken the ISC law by not consulting every other opposition party leader as it requires. Greens finding out via media is beyond sloppy.
        • veutoviper 19.1.1.1

          17 February 2015 at 2:13 pm

          Snap, Sacha. Had not seen yours, when I drafted my 19.2 below.
          • Sacha 19.1.1.1.1

            17 February 2015 at 2:26 pm

            But yours has the refs. Onya.
      • Puckish Rogue 19.1.2

        17 February 2015 at 2:24 pm

        Little will get more votes doing this as opposed to cuddling up to the Greens
        • Sacha 19.1.2.1

          17 February 2015 at 2:28 pm

          Doubt they thought it through. And more votes from who?
          • Puckish Rogue 19.1.2.1.1

            17 February 2015 at 2:39 pm

            Swing center voters
            • Colonial Rawshark 19.1.2.1.1.1

              17 February 2015 at 3:28 pm

              Centrists of any value want to see democratic principles being respected, not political parties being shut out of due process.
              • Puckish Rogue …

                17 February 2015 at 4:19 pm

                Centrist voters want to see the Greens shut out of power, Clark knew it and acted accordingly and it looks like Littles learnt the lesson (and good on him by the way)
              • Chooky …

                17 February 2015 at 5:29 pm

                +100 CR….particularly on the issue of spying on New Zealanders
    • veutoviper 19.2

      17 February 2015 at 1:55 pm

      I have been pretty impressed with Little to date, but on this particular decision he (and/or his advisers) seems not to have checked out the legal requirements.

      Andrea Vance and Katie Bradford have tweeted in the last half hour that Little may have broken the provisions of section 7(1)(d) of the ISC Act which requires the Leader of the Opposition to consult with the leaders of each party that is not in Government before nominating one more member of the ISC Committee in addition to himself as Leader of the Opposition.

      Here is Andrea’s Twitter comment –

      https://twitter.com/avancenz/status/567477921531445248

      And Katie’s – https://twitter.com/katieabradford/status/567480703177072640

      Here is the actual provisions of Section 7 of the Intelligence Security and Communications Act 2014:
      
      7Membership of Committee
      (1)The Committee shall consist of—
      (a)the Prime Minister:
      (b)the Leader of the Opposition:
      (c) 2 members of the House of Representatives nominated for the purpose by the Prime Minister following consultation with the leader of each party in Government:
      (d) 1 member of the House of Representatives nominated for the purpose by the Leader of the Opposition, with the agreement of the Prime Minister, following consultation with the leader of each party that is not in Government or in coalition with a Government party.
      (2)Every person who nominates any person for membership of the Committee shall have regard to the requirements of security.
      (3)The chairperson of the Committee shall be the Prime Minister or such other member of the Committee as shall be appointed from time to time by the Prime Minister as the chairperson of the Committee.
      (4)For the avoidance of doubt, it is hereby declared that any member of Parliament who acts as a member of the Committee shall be deemed, in so acting, to be acting in his or her official capacity as a member of Parliament.

      Ooops – Norman is already hot under the collar about it. Expect no less from Peters…..
      • Chooky 19.2.1

        17 February 2015 at 2:04 pm

        +100…thanks

        ….and where is karol these days to put forward the Green Party perspective?…i miss her….come back karol !
        • veutoviper 19.2.1.1

          17 February 2015 at 2:09 pm

          I miss Karol too. Rosie and I discussed this briefly last week, but presumably she is OK as she is tweeting daily. https://twitter.com/KarolScribe
        • lprent 19.2.1.2

          17 February 2015 at 2:31 pm

          you and me both
          • Anne 19.2.1.2.1

            17 February 2015 at 3:19 pm

            It is her ability to analyse a complex set of circumstances in the blink of an eye that was so valuable. Her posts on the GCSB fiasco last year (and the year before) were a case in point.

            Sorely missed.
            • Olwyn 19.2.1.2.1.1

              17 February 2015 at 3:45 pm

              +1 Anne. I have noticed her absence and miss her informative posts. I’m glad she is OK.
          • One Anonymous Bloke 19.2.1.2.2

            17 February 2015 at 7:37 pm

            +1

            I miss Karol.
      • marty mars 19.2.2

        17 February 2015 at 4:09 pm

        very disappointed by little’s decision around this – shearer instead of a Green is just wrong wrong wrong and the fact that key is happy further shows that it is a mistake from little.

        I really hope that little doesn’t get too big headed and keeps his feet on the ground.
    • Murray Rawshark 19.3

      17 February 2015 at 4:35 pm

      The principles of responsible class collaboration and not rocking the boat, as shown when they voted for extended squirrel powers. Labour want a turn at seeing all our dirty little secrets as well. They don’t want Greens or Winston First upsetting the apple cart. It’s like an exclusive swingers’ club, where they swap partners now and then, but always do things the same way.
      • RedBaronCV 19.3.1

        17 February 2015 at 7:12 pm

        And the 18% or so of the electorate that voted green / NZF don’t get a say on the spying? labour didn’t get many more votes remember- not good enough
    • phillip ure 19.4

      17 February 2015 at 4:35 pm

      i think it is all because shearer is more ‘friendly’ to american-interests..

      ..than wd be turei..

      ..and yep..!..little was far too over-relaxed about extending spook-powers..
      • Murray Rawshark 19.4.1

        17 February 2015 at 4:39 pm

        Shearer is so bad he’d probably accept the squirrels being privatised. Serco could probably handle things. After all, they already run prisons with CCTV, so they could watch us inside our bedrooms as well.
        • Colonial Rawshark 19.4.1.1

          17 February 2015 at 10:14 pm

          Panopticon.
          • Murray Rawshark 19.4.1.1.1

            17 February 2015 at 10:23 pm

            That’s where we’re heading, and I haven’t seen much evidence of Labour wanting to stop the slide. I know why you stay in the shabby organisation, but it must be frustrating.
            • Colonial Rawshark 19.4.1.1.1.1

              17 February 2015 at 10:27 pm

              Indeed, tell me about it.
20. fisiani 20

    17 February 2015 at 12:12 pm

    Andrew Little is the best leader the unions have. He is not an arrogant plonker like The Cunliffe. He can put together a speech unlike Captain Shearer. He could even get Labour to 30%. I like the cut of his jib.
    • Chooky 20.1

      17 February 2015 at 5:32 pm

      well that IS disturbing
21. Stuart Munro 21

    17 February 2015 at 12:27 pm

    Little’s doing well – but he’s not getting it from both sides like Cunliffe was. Doesn’t hurt that teamkey is flagellating ineffectually as the wheels fall off the few things they’ve finangled others into doing for them. The speedy demise of Abbot should help too.

    I think Key has underestimated the resentment his war on the poor provokes in the barren environment created by his ineffectual economic policy. Tears before bedtime.
22. Tom Jackson 22

    17 February 2015 at 12:29 pm

    Call me a cynic, but this is just the media thinking that Key won’t get a fourth term. They will cosy up to Little as long as he doesn’t say anything too left wing. After all, the establishment view Labour governments as a necessary evil – god forbid that a Labour government should actually do what its supporters want.
    • One Anonymous Bloke 22.1

      17 February 2015 at 12:31 pm

      Yes, and Labour always has to be mindful of that. Phrases like “a marriage of pragmatism and principle” don’t coin themselves by accident.
    • Olwyn 22.2

      17 February 2015 at 12:42 pm

      This is the assurance I want to hear from Labour – that they will under no circumstances inflict even more austerity on the poor in exchange for a nice credit rating or some-such. I say this because New Zealand tends to run up debt under the Tories and vote in Labour to take the hit when pay-back time comes around. It is past time for someone to stand up for New Zealand as a whole, as opposed to accepting deals that protect only the propertied settler class and their own career trajectories.
23. swordfish 23

    17 February 2015 at 12:40 pm

    TV3 Reid Research Poll

    Capable Leader

    Little debuts with 54%

    Goff and Shearer both averaged mid 40s on this measurement, a little higher when they won the leadership, a little lower when they stood down. Cunliffe debuted on 50% (unfortunately the 2014 Capable Leader figures appear to have vanished from the Reid Research site, but, from memory, Cunliffe ended in the early-mid 40s).

    Between 2002 and 2004, Clark’s Capable Leader score ranged between 79-89% (don’t have any pre-2002 stats)

    2008-2013, Key’s rating ranged 58-88% – probably lower than 58 when he was in the earlier stages of Opposition leadership in late 2006-2007 (but haven’t got pre-2008 figures). But more than a year into the role, he was still on 58% – just 4 points above Little now. So, I suspect Key debuted on roughly the same rating as Little.

    Key’s Capable Leader ratings received a significant boost in the immediate wake of National’s 2008 Election victory – a kind of deferential/incumbency effect. Averaged 60% during 2008, immediately shot up to 85% in the first post-2008 Election poll. Falling to mid-late 70s by 2014.

    The same incumbency-effect probably happened to Clark in 99.
24. upnorth 24

    17 February 2015 at 1:38 pm

    I’ve had the immense pleasure of working with Andrew and can say this with a large degree of personal certainty.

    He has principles and integrity beyond anything we have seen in the labour leadership in many (perhaps since big Norm) years.

    Refreshingly Andrew doesn’t view the world as “left” or “Right”, them and us or subscribe to any identity cause-celebre. In my experiences with Andrew it was about one common set of principles, those of fairness, decency and justice. That’s pretty much it. Making everyones lives better in a fair way.

    I’m seeing this come through loud and clear in his role as Labour leader. I don’t think we will see a populist sound bite politician in Andrew as we do in Key. I just hope for our countries sake the electorate recognises that in 2017 and we get the government we need and deserve.
    • Anne 24.1

      17 February 2015 at 3:23 pm

      He has principles and integrity beyond anything we have seen in the labour leadership in many (perhaps since big Norm) years.

      That is what I see coming through…
25. Philip Ferguson 25

    17 February 2015 at 5:31 pm

    “It’s looking more and more like Labour has found the right leader at last. And that’s good news no matter where you sit on the political Left!”

    Not really. I sit on the pro-working class left. Labour is utterly dedicated to managing the very system which can’t exist without the exploitation of the working class.

    So who leads them is immaterial. The leader is dedicated to Labour’s strategy of managing a system of exploitation.

    Indeed, at its birth it was even a great supporter and advocate of the White New Zealand policy.

    I like this blog but, yikes, many of you are incredibly naive about Labour and its history. Where have you been all the years Labour has been doing the dirty on the working class?

    Try this: https://rdln.wordpress.com/2011/12/02/the-truth-about-labour-a-bosses-party/

    Phil
26. whateva next? 26

    17 February 2015 at 5:57 pm

    ABSOLUTELY, Andrew not falling for the harpies cry for details and policies (which we never get from National). Focus on values, priorities.
27. the pigman 27

    17 February 2015 at 10:35 pm

    I’m not sure this counts as a principled stand: http://www.3news.co.nz/nznews/little-under-fire-for-unpaid-worker-2015021718#axzz3RnwyCE1E

    Trifling gotcha from the NActs and a disgruntled contractor (going to the NBR, too – good way to ensure he never gets any more work from Andrew, I suppose), but together with the criticism from others on the Left about the decision not to include other parties in the spy agency review, this is what we call a Bad Day.
    • Clemgeopin 27.1

      18 February 2015 at 12:44 am

      Something smells very fishy to me here. Did the journalist at NBR question the man if he had sent the invoice to the correct person and address and when did he send the invoice, did he send a reminder and had he actually met or rung Mr Little about it or about the delay? Was the bill supposed to have been paid by Little or someone else? Was the man a National party spy/stooge set up to embarrass Little? Why did the man need to go to the RW paper, NBR about this? Did he warn Little that if he was not paid by a certain date, then he would go to the newspaper? Was it all a dirty tricks set up by Joyce and National?
      Will NBR help other ‘workers’ with similar complaints in the same way?
      I think these are relevant questions that journalists should investigate. Patrick Gower did not seem to have bothered to have done so.
      • the pigman 27.1.1

        18 February 2015 at 1:21 am

        Agreed – perhaps his office comms team could “fill out” the background with this douchebag further… but will they?

        I doubt it, more likely they’ll try to sweep it under the carpet because they see that explaining is losing (a la Cunliffe and the Donghua Liu smear). Same goes for their fracas with the Greens. Who respects Little more as a result?

        The answer is no-one.
      • Clemgeopin 27.1.2

        18 February 2015 at 9:29 am

        NZ Herald reports this morning:

        ‘Mr Little said the bill had been with a member of his campaign team and he only received it last week.
        It was now paid, he said.’
      • Murray Rawshark 27.1.3

        18 February 2015 at 10:24 am

        Little should have made light of the question and said something along the lines of “I paid him 5 minutes ago, with a late payment bonus. I’m so happy for contractors that Joyce is there to help them. Has he paid Eminem yet?”

        Repeating “I’ve paid it” or whatever the exact words were reminded me of FJK.
28. Reddelusion 28

    17 February 2015 at 10:45 pm

    Does not matter who leads labour’, as a brand they are finished, there constitutency no longer exists, they represent the past and have done their dash They are simply now a career choice for dwindling number of MPs holding on for dear life and a pay cheque they could not dream of in the real world
    • Clemgeopin 28.1

      18 February 2015 at 12:47 am

      Is that you, Joyce? You, Reddelusion are an arrogant clueless fool.
    • David 28.2

      18 February 2015 at 1:58 am

      Crikey, if that is Labour I’d hate (or maybe like) to hear the description of National. They’re all pretty equally useless most of the time. Regardless of what colour they wear. The current lot are proving to be rather particuarly repugnant .
    • Draco T Bastard 28.3

      18 February 2015 at 2:09 am

      Does not matter who leads labour’, as a brand they are finished, there constitutency no longer exists, they represent the past and have done their dash

      As much as I agree with you on that it’s still rather amusing watching you ignore the fact that National represents the even further past. They really are trying to take us back to 15th century feudalism. That’s why they brought back the ancient honours system of Britain rather retaining our own system, why they keep giving the rich ever more power and why they attack the poor.

      Capitalism is over and neither Labour nor National have grasped that yet.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS