Shaw stands down as Greens co-leader

77 comments on “Shaw stands down as Greens co-leader ”

• Comments are now closed

1. observer 1

   30 January 2024 at 11:27 am

   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.
   • Johnr 1.1

     30 January 2024 at 11:35 am

     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
2. Robert Guyton 2

   30 January 2024 at 11:38 am

   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.
   • weka 2.1

     30 January 2024 at 11:42 am

     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.
   • bwaghorn 2.2

     30 January 2024 at 11:46 am

     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.
     • Robert Guyton 2.2.1

       30 January 2024 at 11:48 am

       Details, schmetails…
     • weka 2.2.2

       30 January 2024 at 11:49 am

       I just added the co-leadership election rules to the bottom of the post.
       • bwaghorn 2.2.2.1

         30 January 2024 at 11:56 am

         Maybe time to drop the sexist bit , nz has plenty of woman at the top , some good some not so.
         • weka 2.2.2.1.1

           30 January 2024 at 12:13 pm

           nz has plenty of woman at the top

           I think you will find that where there are no rules to ensure that, it's not true.
       • Psycho Milt 2.2.2.2

         30 January 2024 at 1:22 pm

         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."
         • weka 2.2.2.2.1

           30 January 2024 at 1:25 pm

           I hope it does, lol.

           Shaw just used the word female, so that's promising.
     • Johnr 2.2.3

       30 January 2024 at 11:51 am

       Co-leaders. One to be a woman, one to be Maori.
       • Barfly 2.2.3.1

         30 January 2024 at 12:09 pm

         No compulsion for any to be men or white lol
       • Sabine 2.2.3.2

         30 January 2024 at 1:25 pm

         Marama has that covered

         She identifies as a women

         and she is / identifies as a Maori

         the other co-leader can be any identification.
     • Sabine 2.2.4

       30 January 2024 at 12:21 pm

       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.
       • weka 2.2.4.1

         30 January 2024 at 12:32 pm

         nope. The rules are in the post.
         • Sabine 2.2.4.1.1

           30 January 2024 at 1:26 pm

           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.
           • Sabine 2.2.4.1.1.1

             30 January 2024 at 1:29 pm

             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.
             • weka …

               30 January 2024 at 1:43 pm

               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.
               • Sabine …

                 30 January 2024 at 2:00 pm

                 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.
                 • weka …

                   30 January 2024 at 3:13 pm

                   Women in Green parlance means anyone who identifies as on. They made that clear during the submissions to the Self ID anything less is bigotry and transphobia, and on March 25th.

                   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.
                 • weka …

                   31 January 2024 at 2:03 pm

                   Sabine, I was wrong. From the GP constitution definitions (link in post)

                   1. 2.1.33. ‘Woman’ includes cisgender, trans or intersex women.

                   🙁
                   • Sabine …

                     31 January 2024 at 2:23 pm

                     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.
                   • Dennis Frank …

                     31 January 2024 at 2:29 pm

                     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).
                   • Danyl Strype []

                     2 February 2024 at 9:02 am

                     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.
                   • Anker …

                     31 January 2024 at 11:41 pm

                     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!
   • Psycho Milt 2.3

     30 January 2024 at 1:17 pm

     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."
   • Matiri 2.4

     30 January 2024 at 2:27 pm

     Rod Carr stands down as chair of the Climate Change Commission in 6 months – could James Shaw step in there?
     • Ad 2.4.1

       30 January 2024 at 2:39 pm

       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.
       • James Simpson 2.4.1.1

         30 January 2024 at 3:30 pm

         I have the impression that Luxon has a lot of respect for James. Pure speculation but that appointment would not be at all surprising.
3. Corey 3

   30 January 2024 at 12:35 pm

   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
   • weka 3.1

     30 January 2024 at 12:47 pm

     … but despite his loyalty to the greens he is despised by many in his party while liked outside of it.

     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)?
   • Chess Player 3.2

     30 January 2024 at 12:51 pm

     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.
     • weka 3.2.1

       30 January 2024 at 12:53 pm

       The reason for that was that they were the only party that did anything for the environment

       Environmental policy is developed by the party members.
       • Chess Player 3.2.1.1

         30 January 2024 at 1:53 pm

         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.
         • weka 3.2.1.1.1

           30 January 2024 at 3:15 pm

           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 🤷‍♀️
     • Danyl Strype 3.2.2

       2 February 2024 at 9:10 am

       Chess Player

       even if they hamstrung themselves with the insistence that they would only join with Labour

       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.
4. Patricia Bremner 4

   30 January 2024 at 1:07 pm

   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.'
   • Psycho Milt 4.1

     30 January 2024 at 1:19 pm

     My thoughts exactly!
5. Dennis Frank 5

   30 January 2024 at 1:19 pm

   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…
6. observer 6

   30 January 2024 at 1:22 pm

   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.
   • Psycho Milt 6.1

     30 January 2024 at 1:26 pm

     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.
     • Sabine 6.1.1

       30 January 2024 at 2:05 pm

       They would kill both equally.
       • Visubversa 6.1.1.1

         30 January 2024 at 4:15 pm

         Ah no – we have the secret weapon – the Topp Twins! Boy can they yodel.
         • Sabine 6.1.1.1.1

           30 January 2024 at 4:18 pm

           i was wondering who our bagpipers could be, but true the Top Twins for the win.

           Keep them alive at all cost!!
       • Psycho Milt 6.1.1.2

         30 January 2024 at 6:47 pm

         They did seem very even-handed in their murdering.
7. Descendant Of Smith 7

   30 January 2024 at 1:26 pm

   It's not easy being Green.

   (Can we not embed videos any more?)

   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRZ-IxZ46ng
8. Robert Guyton 8

   30 January 2024 at 2:08 pm

   "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.
9. Ad 9

   30 January 2024 at 2:43 pm

   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.
   • Sabine 9.1

     30 January 2024 at 3:02 pm

     I raise you Chippy.
   • SPC 9.2

     30 January 2024 at 3:20 pm

     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.
     • James Simpson 9.2.1

       30 January 2024 at 3:33 pm

       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.
10. SPC 10

    30 January 2024 at 3:18 pm

    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.
    • weka 10.1

      30 January 2024 at 3:39 pm

      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.
      • Visubversa 10.1.1

        30 January 2024 at 4:21 pm

        But TWAW – rinse and repeat. The word "woman" in Greenspeak is "anyone who says they are". No arguement permitted.
        • weka 10.1.1.1

          30 January 2024 at 4:24 pm

          it's the members that choose the co-leaders, not the caucus/exec.
11. Tiger Mountain 11

    30 January 2024 at 3:20 pm

    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.
    • Sabine 11.1

      30 January 2024 at 4:27 pm

      He is still an MP?

      He just resigned from the role of Co-leader.
      • weka 11.1.1

        30 January 2024 at 4:45 pm

        yep, he's staying on as an MP to do working on his private members Bill, but not staying until the next election.
        • Sabine 11.1.1.1

          30 January 2024 at 4:46 pm

          Well i guess he will resign from his list seat when he decides he is finished.
          • Tiger Mountain 11.1.1.1.1

            30 January 2024 at 5:20 pm

            Well, he has indicated and stated he will be resigning but has not yet left the house for the pedants among us.
            • weka 11.1.1.1.1.1

              30 January 2024 at 6:35 pm

              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.
12. SPC 12

    30 January 2024 at 5:23 pm

    He will remain in Parliament for the time being to support the Bill of Rights (Right to a Sustainable Environment) Amendment Bill.

    https://www.greens.org.nz/james_shaw_announces_resignation

    Next on the list is Dr. Lawrence Xu-Nan (Epsom)

    Lawrence is also the incumbent Policy Co-convenor and a member of the Green Party governing body's alongside the co-leaders Marama and James.

    https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO2304/S00042/green-party-announces-dr-lawrence-xu-nan-as-candidate-for-epsom-electorate.htm
13. higherstandard 13

    30 January 2024 at 6:11 pm

    A very big loss for the Greens and parliament in general.
    • Muttonbird 13.1

      30 January 2024 at 6:43 pm

      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.
      • Higherstandard 13.1.1

        30 January 2024 at 8:53 pm

        I have no idea what you are on about.

        Suggest you have a sit down and a nice cup of tea,
14. Dennis Frank 14

    31 January 2024 at 8:56 am

    Richard Harman reported this:

    In Parliament yesterday afternoon, Shaw acknowledged former National Party Leader and Climate Change spokesperson Todd Muller, who worked with him on the Zero Carbon legislation. The two formed a close relationship, so much so that at the time, Shaw actually apologised to Muller in the House after he had to be excluded from some of the final negotiations on the Zero Carbon Bill at the request of NZ First.

    Muller was also optimistic yesterday that the legislation would survive. “The Prime Minister has been very clear on that in terms of his comments around climate change and the Climate Commission, pre-election,” he said. “And the credit for the establishment of the climate change legislation really sits with James. “I know, of course, Jacinda (Ardern) and Simon (Bridges) deserve acknowledgement as well because, as political leaders, ultimately, they had to decide whether it was in their collective interests to genuinely create a bipartisan framework. “But he really drove the process. “Right from the start, he made it clear that from his perspective, having National commit to the architecture over the long term was critical. “And we needed to work together to identify a way forward to make that happen. “His word was his bond in that sense.”

    However, during the Address in Reply debate yesterday, Shaw made it clear that Muller had driven a hard bargain. “It (the legislation) had to endure changes of Government over multiple decades,” he said. “That is why a number of compromises were made in that piece of legislation, including things I frankly was not happy with and didn’t support but ultimately were necessary in order to ensure that it could endure.”

    Prime Minister Christopher Luxon was also confident yesterday that the legislation could survive. “Very confident,” he said. “I can tell you, as I’ve said many times before, over the last two years, the National Party is deeply committed to delivering on those commitments. I think that is genuinely something that will stay enshrined and endure, long beyond, long beyond James and all of us.” But there is another factor that might add to Luxon’s confidence; he and Shaw have had a relationship pre-dating Luxon’s time in politics, which has seen each develop a respect for the other. “James Shaw is actually one of the opposition MPs I really respect,” he said yesterday. “I got to know James outside of coming to politics myself, and I’ve become good friends with him over the last three years as well. “I’ve really respected James and what he’s achieved, and I think he leaves this place having left in place something that’s pretty enduring, the net zero legislation.

    Continue reading at https://www.politik.co.nz/a-parliamentary-idealist-goes/ | Politik

    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.
    • Chess Player 14.1

      31 January 2024 at 9:34 am

      '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.
15. Obtrectator 15

    31 January 2024 at 9:29 am

    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?
    • Chess Player 15.1

      31 January 2024 at 9:36 am

      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?
      • weka 15.1.1

        31 January 2024 at 10:40 am

        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
16. Dennis Frank 16

    31 January 2024 at 9:53 am

    Not Green enough??

    Former Green MP Catherine Delahunty intimated, as RNZ headlined it, "James Shaw may not have been green enough."

    "What he has believed to be the best strategy is not necessarily supported by everybody because it's not resulting in pressuring Labour to take stronger action — in fact, it's seen as very weak by many of us involved in activism, and I think obviously by some of the party members as well."

    Obviously. But a minority. In this morning's media conference, 1News deputy political editor Maiki Sherman asked Shaw if that kind of experience had been difficult. "Oh, yes", he replied. With a fleeting smile. But it made him, he thought, better at his job. Perhaps Shaw's most singular determination was to spread Green politics beyond tribe (or activist) Green.

    "I am not committed to partisanship for its own sake," he said, in his maiden speech. "Political tribalism is, I believe, the greatest barrier to creating enduring solutions to the great challenges of our time."

    Tribalism, a party like the Greens can't win broad support with it, but almost can't survive (politically) without it. Again, James Shaw indirectly spoke to that, this morning. Talking about the National Policy Statement on Indigenous Biodiversity he described trying to "represent the indigenous worldview in an RMA instrument", and concluded, with a droll sagacity, "we got to about as good a place, which is kind of dissatisfactory to everyone in equal measure". The poor bastard. When success is being "kind of dissatisfactory to everyone in equal measure". And that, in a way, is part of the balancing act the Greens, James Shaw and Marama Davidson, appear in recent years, to have fixed upon. https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/01/30/john-campbell-the-james-shaw-conundrum/

    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.
17. Grey Area 17

    31 January 2024 at 11:28 am

    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.
    • weka 17.1

      31 January 2024 at 11:41 am

      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.
      • weka 17.1.1

        31 January 2024 at 12:05 pm

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xhso2zuhZSY&ab_channel=Newshub
18. Mike the Lefty 18

    31 January 2024 at 12:07 pm

    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.
19. Dennis Frank 19

    1 February 2024 at 10:40 am

    Todd's retrospective on James:

    On September 23 2014 I found myself walking alongside a certain James Shaw at the welcome pōwhiri for new MPs in parliament. As the induction ceremony unfolded we found ourselves reacting with the same eye rolls and bemused chuckles to the whole boarding school feel of it. The dos and don’ts and various arcane rules of parliament were a far cry from the corporate life from which we had both emerged after years of concurrent professional and political activism.

    On the face of it, given our differing political ideologies, we should have had little in common. But our corporate backgrounds and similar senses of humour created that initial connection. Our friendship grew over coffees and dinners as we privately shared our experiences navigating the promise and perils of a political career. https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/01-02-2024/todd-muller-my-friend-james-shaw-embodied-the-best-of-nz-politics

    He give us a glimpse of their collaborative process:

    Our negotiation was unusual for the politics of our time. There was no “largely written” bill that I was consulted on at five minutes to midnight as often is the way when governments seek bipartisan support for legislation. Rather, it meant a lengthy series of weekly conversations that started with a whiteboard and a beer and ended with unanimous parliamentary support for the Zero Carbon Bill and the establishment of a Climate Commission, underpinned by targets and a series of five yearly carbon budgets.

    Global politics seems to be backtracking from such constructive consensus. Instead it’s embracing a partisan and at times frankly toxic approach that inevitability leads to division, both in governments and in the communities they serve.

    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.

    There is no bridging the divide; it’s all about making the divide as stark a chasm as possible to motivate your supporters to vote – more out of fear than aspiration.

    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.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS