Written By:
notices and features - Date published:
11:20 am, January 30th, 2024 - 77 comments
Categories: greens, james shaw -
Tags:
James Shaw has announced that he is standing down as co-leader of the Green Party and a leadership process will be triggered. He will stay on in Parliament in the meantime.
From the Green Party website:
Hon James Shaw, the architect of New Zealand’s landmark climate change legislation, the Zero Carbon Act, has announced that he will be stepping down as Co-leader of the Green Party in March. He will remain in Parliament for the time being to support the Bill of Rights (Right to a Sustainable Environment) Amendment Bill.
“It has been the privilege of my lifetime to serve as New Zealand’s Climate Change Minister for the last six years and as Green Party Co-leader for nearly nine. It has been an honour to serve alongside my Co-leader, Hon Marama Davidson, her predecessor Metiria Turei, and an extraordinary Caucus of Green MPs, staff, party officials and volunteers,” says James Shaw.
“I’m very proud of what the Green Party has achieved over the last eight years. I would like to thank Green Party members and supporters for their incredible hard work and support over that time.
“In 2017, the Greens became a party of government, with ministers, for the first time. We also made political history by increasing our support at the end of each of our two terms – a feat no other government support partner had achieved.
“In Government, we passed the landmark Zero Carbon Act with unanimous support across Parliament, becoming one of the first countries in the world to place the Paris Agreement’s 1.5’C target in national legislation.
“It is especially gratifying to see the Zero Carbon Act survive its first change of government. New Zealand can be proud that it has an enduring climate change framework, with long-term targets and institutions that will guide us over several decades and changes of government.
“Returning to Opposition, the Green Party now has the largest Caucus of MPs we’ve ever had, including three electorates for the first time.
“It has taken many thousands of people, in all walks of life, to achieve what we have over the near decade I’ve been Co-leader, and I would like to thank every single one of you.
“Our historic election result in 2023 ushered in a new era for the Green Party. Now is the time for a new Co-leader to work alongside Marama to take this new Caucus into the future.
“The Green Party will continue to lead the fight to stop the climate crisis, restore and protect our wildernesses and wildlife, eliminate poverty, and honour Te Tiriti,” says James Shaw.
Notes
James Shaw has been Co-leader of the Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand since May 2015. He served as a government minister for two terms, holding the portfolios of Climate Change (2017-2023), Statistics (2017-2020), Associate Finance (2017-2020) and Associate Environment (2020-2023).
Nominations for the role of Co-leader of the Green Party will open tomorrow, Wednesday 31 January 2024 and close on Wednesday 14 February.
Green Party members will attend local meetings, where they will vote to elect a new co-leader.
Each branch is entitled to a certain number of votes proportionate to the number of members who live in that electorate.
The new Co-leader is expected to be announced on 10 March.
.
The Green Party co-leader election rules, from the party’s constitution (PDF). Co-leaders don’t need to be MPs, they just need to be a party member (Russell Norman became co-leader before he became an MP):
5.8 The Co-Leader, Party Co-Convenor and Policy Co-Convenor positions are elected annually at the AGM:
5.8.1. One woman; and
5.8.2. One person of any gender.
5.8.2.1. If no women are nominated for Co-Leader, Party Co-Convenor or Policy Co-Convenor, nominations for one Co-Leader, Party Co-Convenor or Policy Co-Convenor position (as the case may be) must be re-opened.
5.8.3. For the Co-Leader positions, one must be Māori.
5.8.3.1. If no Māori candidates are nominated for Co-Leader or only one Māori candidate is nominated and their nomination is not endorsed by Te Rōpū Pounamu, nominations for one Co-Leader position must be re-opened.
5.8.3.2. If two or more Māori candidates run, Te Rōpū Pounamu endorsement is not required for eligibility.
5.8.3.2.1. However, Te Rōpū Pounamu may, if they wish to, formally express their
support for one or more Māori candidates.
5.9. If a vacancy in any of the Co-Leader, Party Co-Convenor and Policy Co-Convenor positions occurs between AGMs, Kaunihera must:
5.9.1. Hold a ballot of delegates chosen by electorates as for an AGM; or
5.9.2. Call an SGM for that purpose; or
5.9.3. Defer the election to the next AGM if it will be held within three months.
The current rise of populism challenges the way we think about people’s relationship to the economy.We seem to be entering an era of populism, in which leadership in a democracy is based on preferences of the population which do not seem entirely rational nor serving their longer interests. ...
The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.
When an MP leaves they give a valedictory speech, and often it's along the lines of "sorry about that thing I did, that law I supported", a phoney self-justification after the fact.
James won't need to say that. He can honestly say "I did everything I could, and for the right reasons". Sadly, the voters and/or politicians from other parties limited his power to do more.
Go well, James.
I always thought he was a noble person. Easily distinguished among his peers.
It leaves an opportunity for Chloe. But not sure I should wish it on her, given the piranhas in welly
That's a big blow.
I expect he'll move sideways into a role where his expertise around climate change will be supported, rather than thwarted.
Perhaps, like Russel Norman, he'll take on a significant role in an existing NGO and from there, hold the climate-change-denying Government of the moment, to account.
James' tenure as Green co-leader is one he can be proud of, imo.
Enter Chloe, stage Left.
yep, big blow. I really hope this is for good reasons. He is an outstanding MP and leader, one of the best we've got.
Last time I looked Cloe is a woman, I thought the greens had to have 50/50 split in leadership, ?
He's always impressed me , sad to see him go.
Details, schmetails…
I just added the co-leadership election rules to the bottom of the post.
Maybe time to drop the sexist bit , nz has plenty of woman at the top , some good some not so.
I think you will find that where there are no rules to ensure that, it's not true.
Thank you! For those wondering what the hell "5.8.2. One person of any gender" means, in plain English it just means "One person of either sex."
I hope it does, lol.
Shaw just used the word female, so that's promising.
Co-leaders. One to be a woman, one to be Maori.
No compulsion for any to be men or white lol
Marama has that covered
She identifies as a women
and she is / identifies as a Maori
the other co-leader can be any identification.
She could identify as non binary. I think the greens changed the co-leadership to one person who identifies as woman and the other who identifies as something other then woman?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Party_of_Aotearoa_New_Zealand#:~:text=The%20Green%20Party%20constitution%20bars,co%2Dconvenor%20of%20any%20gender.
nope. The rules are in the post.
so this is incorrect?
"Now, the requirements for the party's co-leadership is that one co-leader must be female. The other person can be any gender. The party's rules also state one co-leader must be Māori. Marama Davidson, being female and Māori, currently covers both of those co-leadership requirements."
https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/01/30/james-shaw-resigns-how-will-the-greens-choose-a-new-co-leader/#:~:text=Now%2C%20the%20requirements%20for%20the,of%20those%20co%2Dleadership%20requirements.
and just for nitpicking reasons
must be female is kind of transphobic as many transwomen indeed identify as 'female'.
So I would assume (I meaning me and only me)
'female' to be both
biological sex and self identification.
And i am sure that Marama Davidson identifies as women who is a female.
Whilst the other co-leader could very well identify as a women who is male.
edit:
The other c-leader could also be a female but one who identifies as Man, Non binary, or something else altogether.
Assuming that by woman they mean adult human female*, then the GP co-leaders could be one woman, and one trans/NB identifying female. Or two women.
Or one woman and one man. Or one woman and one trans/NB identifying male.
I've not seen anything from the Greens in regards to co-leadership and gender identity, but I think the language is loose enough to allow people to identify how they want and this no impact on the leadership election.
I don't think it's possible for the co-leaders to be one man and one TW. It's not how I read the rules, but also, I just don't think the members would vote for that because to get it through would cause a lot of problems for the party.
*Shaw used the word 'female' today when referring to the co-leader rules.
Women in Green parlance means ' anyone who identifies as one', hence the use of female by Shaw. They made that clear during the submissions to the Self ID anything less is bigotry and transphobia, and on March 25th.
Ditto for Labour, National, ACT and TPM.
One can not sign on to the self ID bill and continue to pretend that women means human female of any age. That would be either very hypocritical on the part of those that signed that bill, or it would be very foolish on the part of the electorate to pretend that it stills means that.
Women for all intents and purposes is now a mixed sex category.
1. you are conflating some MPs with the whole party. MPs don't pick GP co-leaders, members do (by delegate this time I think).
2. Self-ID in NZ via the BDMRR Bill hasn't afaik removed or negated other legislation that enables things like single sex spaces. So it's not true to say that one can support the Bill and not see the female co-leaderpositions as meaning Adult Human Female.
3. I've not seen anything from the Greens that says 'woman' = an identity. If that is what they meant, then what is the point of the rule that says one co-leader needs to be a person of any gender? Imo, the way the rule is written is to protect the role for women and to enable people who are trans or NB to have a chance at the role without courting the inevitable shitstorm that would happen if a TW stood for female co-leader.
I'm guessing at #3, but it's an informed guess based on listening to members as much as MPs, MSM and SM, and understanding that the NZ GP aren't as batshit crazy as the UK Greens and they've managed to promote their (imo erroneous) gender identity ideology policies without completely losing the plot.
Sabine, I was wrong. From the GP constitution definitions (link in post)
🙁
I am sorry to tell you that I did not expect anything less from the Greens.
You can not behave like KereKere did during the submission, can not rock up at a women speak even with a twitter post 'fighting Nazi's' as Grahaman did, post a message about 'transjoy' as Swarbrick did, blame all 'cis white male ' for all violence as Davidson did and still pretend that women = human female of all ages.
Fwiw, at least they are consequent here. And fwiw, that is the Greens all over the western world.
Women is for all intends and purposes a mixed sex category, and chances are that the same applies for Men.
Sorry.
As I suspected but well done for researching the fact. They seem to view trans ideology as determinant. It concedes a personal stance as being the effective reality when a critical mass of similar folk attain collective leverage on the democratic process.
It implies dysfunctional cognition in the Greens: subjective reality is driven by personal stances whereas objective reality is manifested via relative social group influence within a social nexus niche. Seems like the take by the GP is that policy blends subjectivity with objectivity, yet they leave that tacit (rather than explain themselves).
Look, I'm the first to criticise the hamfisted and counterproductive ways some Green MPs and activists have responded to fear-driven rhetoric on "identity" issues. But the sex/gender thing really isn't that complicated.
Sex is an objective biological fact; people are born male, female, or intersex. Gender is a subjective social interpretation based on that objective fact; people are brought up to be "men" or " women". It's not a "fact" that a person is a woman, any more than it's a "fact" that they're beautiful or wise.
One person I know was assumed to be male, based on external appearances, and was brought up to be a man. Later in life, it was discovered that he was intersex. The fact is, he wasn't physically male. But he was most definitely a man.
Yes the Greens must live up to their own standards, otherwise they must admit their transphobia.
If a man who identifies as a woman wants to stand for co-leadership then that trans woman is a woman! And if it just so happens a man stands for the other position, then ……….Its madness of course.
Love your work Sabine!
I agree, this is a big loss to the Greens. I was thinking "there's no-one else among the Green MPs with anything like his level of competence," but on reflection it's hard to think of any other party's MPs with his level of competence so the Greens aren't alone in that. He's like a living embodiment of the adage "Don't be a dick."
Rod Carr stands down as chair of the Climate Change Commission in 6 months – could James Shaw step in there?
Nice idea.
But can't imagine Shaw would stand down without another gig lined up.
Perhaps Luxon has given him the word precisely for this role. Which would be a big vote of confidence in the Commission as well as in Shaw.
I have the impression that Luxon has a lot of respect for James. Pure speculation but that appointment would not be at all surprising.
As a reluctant Green voter, this is a bummer James was a good bloke and one of the more likable figures In NZ politics and people accross the political spectrum like him. He's a huge loss to the party, whether they admit it or not.
If it wasn't for him I don't think the Greens would have reached the 5% threshold in 2017.
He's spent his career trying to build the Greens as a credible and more progressive center left alternative to the increasingly conservative and flavorless center-center right Labour party.
He at one point was offered the leadership of Top, and opted not to jump ship, but despite his loyalty to the greens he is despised by many in his party while liked outside of it.
I've never understood the hatred he gets within the Greens caucus and flax roots, going as far as to try roll him without having a candidate (although Elizabeth Kerekere seemed at one point to indicate she would… Just lol)
How many times do you reckon he bashed his head against the wall over the mean girls antics and utterly bizzare statements and behavior from elements of the party during his tenure. Goodness
Go well James.
I hope the Greens don't let the fringe elements of the party take over in his absence.
One of the things I liked the most about the greens was having a male and female coleadership each from a different wing of the party, I hope they keep two gender coleadership. The weird new leadership rules should be done away with…
It's time now for Marama to step down imo, time for the new generationlet Chloe take the reigns, she's enormously popular and has a vastly larger presence in social and traditional media and is the only green mp to twice win an electorate seat.
Chloe and Collins or Chloe and Steve Able would be a dream team
some, not many, I think. The young greens obviously, but beyond them, who in the party has expressed hatred, or acted against him? What evidence is there for that coming from caucus (apart from EK)?
I've voted for the Greens more often than I have for any other party, over the decades, despite some of the lunatic fringe that comes with that.
The reason for that was that they were the only party that did anything for the environment, even if they hamstrung themselves with the insistence that they would only join with Labour, effectively halving their opportunity to effect changes in policy.
Now that Shaw is gone, it will be interesting to see whether there's any reason for me to keep voting for them.
Environmental policy is developed by the party members.
Of course it is.
But who the messenger is, and how they work with other people, is what gets it through from being just a policy to an actual change in real life.
Hopefully the members elect someone who knows how to do more than just shout and stamp their feet.
don't know who you have in mind, but the Greens have no history of electing co-leaders who only shout and stamp their feet, so 🤷♀️
Chess Player
Where does this myth come from? The Greens have always said they’ll work with other parties on areas of policy agreement, and they do.
When it comes to declaring potential coalition partners, it’s based purely on which parties they have the most policy in common with. So far they’ve had more in common with Labour, but they’ve never ruled out working with National if their policy were to become more progressive than Labour’s.
Thank you James Shaw. You literally took it on the chin. You, like Cullen, have left a legacy of thoughtful constructive legislation. No higher accolade in my book "He is a good person.'
My thoughts exactly!
The political trajectory of the GP seems to have reached a crossroads. Relevance is in question since the broader global context of the overall Green movement captured the avante garde position in western civilisation long ago, and has been steering the whole for the past 30 years despite neolib hegemony, yet the GP remained stubbornly partisan.
Up to the replacement co-leader to rectify that failure of representation of the broader global movement. Reframing isn't essentially hard: depends if one is a normalcy addict. I trust James has a new personal trajectory awaiting his transition…
Politics is absurdly unfair sometimes.
Try the "meet the Martians" test. Imagine the aliens arrive on Earth and say "take me to your leader!". Now, ignoring all issues of party policy but focusing only on qualities of human leadership (empathy, integrity, competence, moral compass, grasp of details or even just the ability to make sense in a sentence), would you want them to meet Shaw or Luxon?
Not a tough decision. But we're stuck with the other one.
It depends on the aliens. For example, if it were the aliens in "Mars Attacks!", I'd greatly prefer that they were introduced to Luxon rather than Shaw. But otherwise, yes, I totally get your point.
They would kill both equally.
Ah no – we have the secret weapon – the Topp Twins! Boy can they yodel.
i was wondering who our bagpipers could be, but true the Top Twins for the win.
Keep them alive at all cost!!
They did seem very even-handed in their murdering.
It's not easy being Green.
(Can we not embed videos any more?)
"Shaw & Steadfast" (from today's live broadcast from the House).
Chris Hipkins’ statement in the House today was lively, connected and at times, funny. Luxon was dull.
James Shaw’s words were heartfelt.
No surprise.
I liked him because he worked all sides of the House and built enduring consensus. That's rare.
No one in NZ argues about the reality of climate change anymore.
And his carbon legislation isn't being touched.
His record strengthening the Green Party vote is admirable.
Presumably he has a better gig, so I sincerely wish him well in it.
Robertson next.
I raise you Chippy.
Agree, but keep your hands of Robertson, it's his job to stubb out Willis in the house before that arsonist does too much damage.
Most good politicians know when its time to go. Cullen didn't hang around to stubb out English, as he identified his time had passed, he had been voted out, and it was time to pass the role onto young blood and new ideas.
Robbo will do the same in the next 12 months.
5.8.1. One woman; and
5.8.2. One person of any gender.
So the Green Party recognises that sex is not the same as gender in its own rules?
One biological sex adult female and one other.
Thus one female who identifies by biological sex and another who identifies by gender – one for older Greens and one for the younger progressive liberals (male or female or bi-gender or transgender)?
My chocolate fish award for the person who set up constitutional safeguards to prevent a transgender person claiming the woman's co-leadership role.
I think it's smart because it protects the female role and enables trans/NB to be co-leader.
However, the wording is unclear because the term gender is use interchangeably with sex in English. The word 'any' is doing a fair amount of heavy lifting.
But TWAW – rinse and repeat. The word "woman" in Greenspeak is "anyone who says they are". No arguement permitted.
it's the members that choose the co-leaders, not the caucus/exec.
Rare is the day when an NZ MP, let alone a party co–leader, resigns from the house with head high, particularly those with a few years under their belt. Faded dreams, scandal, ill health, loss of mojo are common. James Shaw has done well indeed navigating the shit show that we call NZ parliamentary politics–and he modestly stated that with his achievements and the party's current big caucus with real talent in it.
He is still an MP?
He just resigned from the role of Co-leader.
yep, he's staying on as an MP to do working on his private members Bill, but not staying until the next election.
Well i guess he will resign from his list seat when he decides he is finished.
Well, he has indicated and stated he will be resigning but has not yet left the house for the pedants among us.
He has resigned as co-leader, but hasn't resigned as an MP and will be in the house as an MP for some time.
https://www.greens.org.nz/james_shaw_announces_resignation
Next on the list is Dr. Lawrence Xu-Nan (Epsom)
https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO2304/S00042/green-party-announces-dr-lawrence-xu-nan-as-candidate-for-epsom-electorate.htm
A very big loss for the Greens and parliament in general.
I'm surprised you didn't call him, "two mums".
But I guess this is reflection of the reduced threat James Shaw posed to the right. The nut jobs began to praise him as a real Green, and the last bastion of sensibility. They no longer needed to target him in the way they do brown progressive women.
I have no idea what you are on about.
Suggest you have a sit down and a nice cup of tea,
Richard Harman reported this:
James has proven that consensus politics does work. It makes a real shift towards a better world actually happen. Therefore leftists ought to use it as political praxis.
'consensus politics does work'
Agreed, and in fact it's the only approach that will work, give our MMP system and the nature of NZers in avoiding anything radical.
Hopefully whoever replaced Shaw as co-leader will realise this.
The good thing is that now he is free to work with whoever he wants to on whatever environmental initiatives make sense to him, as opposed to being constrained by the Green party membership who clearly haven't valued him as much as they should.
The Guardian, whose on-line version has a whole section headed "New Zealand / Aotearoa", has so far made no mention at all of this! Are all their stringers here still at the beach?
It's the resignation of a co-leader for a minor opposition party.
Maybe it's not the top priority with everything else going on?
given there haven't been any pieces since the 26th, I think that's not it. They have NZ writers.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/newzealand
Not Green enough??
The GP co-leaders led the Greens into a substantial achievement in practical politics, which will forever testify to the capacity of the GP to transcend partisan stances – getting results instead of perpetual complaining.
Others have alluded to this being step one of Shaw's exit strategy. Step 2 try and see through the carbon bill. Step 3 resign and move into a role like head of the Climate Change Commission.
I wonder if he feels he's done all he was able to and with an anti-climate change action government in place for the next 33 months (maybe) he doesn't want to bang his head against the wall and it's a good time to go.
The video of the press conference is illuminating. It mostly sounds like he's been doing the job for nearly a decade and it's time to move on, let someone else come in. He said his goals coming into the job were to see the Greens into government and out the other side, and that's happened.
If Chloe is elected to replace James she will be a very different type of leader, which may be good or bad depending on what your point of view is.
From the perspective of the hard right, Chloe will be a nightmare. She has no fear of getting up the noses of the rich pricks and their mouth pieces on Newstalk ZB and will call Mike Hosking out for the big-headed prick that he is. By contrast James was always very controlled and probably never said a bad word about anyone in public.
The other factor, pointed out in yesterday's Nine to Noon show on RNZ, is that Chloe represents a younger generation and possibly will bring a new more socialist agitator style to the Greens.
One question is whether the intense concentration on environmental problems and solutions will be maintained without James, and how this will resonate with traditional Greens supporters.
Todd's retrospective on James:
He give us a glimpse of their collaborative process:
It's dialectic: folks oscillate between two poles – they converge/diverge. Maybe it seems a paradox but humans converse whilst being diverse. Partisan alignments are mesocosmic in nature: they function medial between macrocosm & microcosm. People use small groups as mesocosm, to socialise their opinions. Common ground formed in a group may contrast with common ground in society,and when it does we get paranoia.
Yes, the politics of fear are trendy. Yet he fails to point out that democracy is producing this state of fear. Politicians are such slow learners. So are most commentators.