Stepping up: new energy from Kelvin Davis

Written By: - Date published: 10:20 am, April 23rd, 2014 - 115 comments
Categories: child welfare, education, election 2014, employment, hone harawira, housing, Kelvin Davis, labour, mana-party, Maori Issues, Maori seats, poverty, unemployment - Tags:

There’s a lot of skewed headlines from the MSM, showing their anti-Labour bias.  But I have been really impressed with the united way Labour has swung in behind the change from Jones to Kelvin Davis.  Jones has been talked about positively, and given best wishes for his chosen new direction.

Kelvin Davis jobs for whanau

Kelvin Davis, is next on Labour’s List, after a pretty good term in the House from 2008 to 2011.  He has seemed to me to be pretty moderate, meaning I would’t agree with everything he said and did. However, I caught his interview on TV3’s First Line this morning, and was impressed with his professionalism, his down-to-earth manner of speaking, and his energetic response to the sudden change in direction his career is about to take.

Since challenging for the party leadership last year, Mr Jones has since been one of Labour’s most high-profile MPs, so his abrupt exit surprised many of his colleagues – most of all his likely replacement, Kelvin Davis.

“I found out along with the rest of the country when Patrick Gower announced it on the news last night,” Mr Davis said on Firstline this morning.

“But the difference with me and the rest of the country is that Patrick’s arm reached out from the TV screen and tapped me on the shoulder and said, ‘You’re next, boy.'”

Mr Davis says no one in Labour will hold a grudge against Mr Jones.

“Your priorities change, your focus changes. Shane’s moving onto something that he feels he wants to do, and good on him.”

Basically, Davis stepped up quickly, and showed he will be an asset to Labour  during the election campaign and beyond. He also said that he needs to step up and lead the Maori part of the Labour Party.

TVNZ Marae debate for the Te Tai Tokerau by election in 2011, showing both Hone Harawira and Kelvin Davis to be strong performers.  It would be good to see them working together in a Labour-led government. The debate includes Hon, Kelvin and Solomon Tipene.

Both Harawira and Davis are aiming to improve the lives of those on low incomes: more and better employment opportunities, better educational outcomes, better housing, and a commitment to working for Maori in Te Tai Tokerau and elsewhere.

115 comments on “Stepping up: new energy from Kelvin Davis ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Jenny Kirk 1
    23 April 2014 at 10:27 am

    Agree with you on all of this Karol. I helped with the Davis campaign in the north last election, and was very disappointed Kel missed out on being back in Parliament then. He’s a good guy and will easily fill any gap being left by Shane Jones in the north.

    And like you, I find the mainstream media comment about Shane’s departure, skewed, nasty and unrealistic. One man’s departure doesn’t sink a ship !

    • Redbaiter 1.1
      23 April 2014 at 11:11 am

      Kelvin is a teacher.

      Just another academic who will help hasten the Labour party’s gradual slide away from its working class roots.

      Out of touch with its base, Labour continues to select candidates who will drive its core voters into supporting National.

      • lprent 1.1.1
        23 April 2014 at 11:25 am

        Kelvin is a teacher. Just another academic…

        Munter. Exactly how ignorant are you? I’ve never noticed that teachers are academics.

        Hell I have a number of degrees and I’m certainly not an academic. They are just the training tools that I used to get my job, just like my father did his fitter and turner apprenticeship.

        My partner could (I suppose) be construed as being a academic as she works at the uni and does some teaching in her profession of being filmmaker. But teaching accounting students about the importance of multimedia doesn’t appear to me to be particularly “academic”. More in the order of hammer and chisel work I’d have said.

        If you count teachers as being “academics” then at least 20-25% of the country are. Many people these days have qualifications from tertiary institutions to a university degree level. Even more have professional training from tertiary level education institutions. That appears to be the level you’re putting your boundary of an “academic” at – because teachers only usually have those types of qualifications.

        I’ve said it before. You are a fossil of an era long past and (thankfully) largely forgotten apart from other mindless fossils who think with their slogans.

        • Redbaiter 1.1.1.1
          23 April 2014 at 12:18 pm

          Kelvin has also failed every time he has put himself up for election. This would seem to suggest that working class voters find him unrepresentative, and the only way he makes it into the parliament is through the favour of other academics. Is this democratic?

          BTW, its a mistake to think I am a relic. I am actually spearheading a trend that will make itself far more well known here in years to come.

          I’ve been called out dated for years by leftists and as every year has gone by they have lost ground to right wing/ conservative forces.

          We will defeat you, and in the end, we will defeat the Progressives (Key & Slater for example) who control National as well.

          Its going to happen because we have the forward momentum. I think the left know it too, they just won’t admit it to themselves.

          This rubbish about Conservatism being out dated is just an attempt at self delusion.

          We are the next political wave.

          • karol 1.1.1.1.1
            23 April 2014 at 12:26 pm

            Davis said in the First Line interview, with each election in Te Tai Tokerau, he has increased his share of the votes. He has pulled a significant numner of votes.

            Also, how a candidate does in an election depends a lot on electorate demographics, and the opposing candidates. Davis is up against a strong candidate in Harawira.

            • Pete George 1.1.1.1.1.1
              23 April 2014 at 12:31 pm

              From what I’ve seen Davis is fairly widely respect across the spectrum. Getting paid as an MP to run his campaign will even up an advantage that Harawira had.

              And Harawira may well take a hit from his Internet Party association.

              Te Tai Tokerau will get a lot of media attention – that also helps the challenger.

              It will be an interesting contest.

          • Pete George 1.1.1.1.2
            23 April 2014 at 12:27 pm

            We are the next political wave.

            “We”?

            You have said you had a twenty year plan, how far into that are you?

            You have said you want to take things back to how they were, like education. How far back?

          • cardassian 1.1.1.1.3
            23 April 2014 at 12:37 pm

            “BTW, its a mistake to think I am a relic. I am actually spearheading a trend that will make itself far more well known here in years to come.

            I’ve been called out dated for years by leftists and as every year has gone by they have lost ground to right wing/ conservative forces.

            We will defeat you, and in the end, we will defeat the Progressives (Key & Slater for example) who control National as well.”

            So you’re the leading the New Zealand branch of Teabaggers?

          • lprent 1.1.1.1.4
            23 April 2014 at 12:41 pm

            Kelvin has also failed every time he has put himself up for election.

            In maori electorate seats it is usually damn hard to defeat the incumbent. He has gone up against a very popular incumbent three times, twice with a strongish third candidate from the Maori party.

            BTW, its a mistake to think I am a relic
            This rubbish about Conservatism being outdated

            I wasn’t talking about conservatism. I was talking about messaging.

            If you want to get people to take you seriously, perhaps you should stop using simplistic scare tactic language from the 1950s McCarthy era. Those were the days when populations weren’t very well educated and simplistic rabble rousing over the new fangled media actually worked.

            Most people in the developed world are somewhat more cynical about messaging these days. You get down into the facebook generations with their continuous exposure to messaging and they just start laughing and passing around such archaic messaging as a joke.

            If you want to continue using your current framing, then I’d suggest that you look for a country with a much simpler media framework (and hurry because they’re disappearing rapidly).

            If you want to succeed in a country like NZ, then I suggest that you look at going and looking at doing some study on messaging and framing in the modern era.

            • Redbaiter 1.1.1.1.4.1
              23 April 2014 at 1:05 pm

              Actually, I’m really happy with the gains I consider I have made.

              And although I understand your comments re language, I think you are misunderstanding the strategy. All that repitition, that strong language has a purpose.

              The task was to break through the Berlin wall the left have built around language, and it doesn’t matter whether one uses a battering ram or more subtle means. As long as the wall comes down, we’re winning.

              The objective in NZ is to draw the political discussion way from Marxist subjects. Racism, sexism, multi-culturalism, so many isms are basically a result of Marxist ideas deeply intrenched in the NZ psyche over the last 60 odd years or more. As a result of Frankfurt School penetration of our political systems.

              We have to get back to talking about liberty and individual freedom. These were the issues that made the West the envy of every other civilisation.

              Thanks to Marxists, that civilisation is in serious decline.

              That decline will be arrested and eventually reversed. We just need to stop talking about phony Marxist rubbish and talk about reality.

              • Draco T Bastard …
                23 April 2014 at 1:22 pm

                These were the issues that made the West the envy of every other civilisation.

                Only in the Wests dreams – every other civilisation was far more advanced than the West and far more humane. Hell, the idea that government should stay out of trade originated in Islam but Islam at least viewed trade as mutual cooperation for everyone’s survival rather than the West’s view that its’ everyone competing against each other (David Graeber’s Debt: The first 5000 years).

                That decline will be arrested and eventually reversed.

                Considering that it was your policies that started the decline, guess what?

              • lprent …
                23 April 2014 at 1:39 pm

                It does rather amuse me that you look at all of those changes to society as being part of the “marxist subjects”.

                As far as I can tell, they mostly derive their basis almost entirely from the 18th century humanist movement.

                The marxist movement was far less about overcoming bias against groups of individuals and far more about spreading the benefits of industrial civilisation across the people producing it. In other words it was largely an economics model rather than one about humans. Which is why I think that it didn’t work too well in practice.

                Personally I’d like to extend my personal freedoms in the Heinlein model too (which is mostly where I have seen your brand of politics before). In particular the freedom to practice the art of eugenics on offensive bigots. But I’m sure that everyone has their little list of the people and types of people that they’d like to deal to.

                Which is the reason that we have some of those restrictions on our personal freedoms. It is to protect the bigots so that they too may have the opportunity to argue.

                The main thing that I think that needs to be protected inside “western” (and every other) societies is the ability to bicker reasonably safely. That was, plus the ripping of cheap resources after the black death and later colonialism, the primary basis that fuelled the explosion of western societies from the late 15th century onwards.

                It had very little to do with “liberty and individual freedom” which were concepts that arose much later and which like marxism don’t appear to have ever worked well with actual humans in a society for any length of time. In fact virtually every successful society I’ve ever looked at runs more on a benign despotism model. Roughly, “we don’t care too much what you say or even do until it starts impacting on others with a political voice” and then we have considerably despotic power to deal with it. Most of your beef appears to be with others gaining a political voice.

                Doesn’t sound to me like you favour the ability to bicker safely. After all there are all of these topics that you seem to want to suppress being talked about. Now is that “individual freedom”?

                • Draco T Bastard …
                  23 April 2014 at 1:53 pm

                  +1

                • Redbaiter …
                  23 April 2014 at 1:59 pm

                  Only govts can suppress free speech Lyn.

                  And as I favour small powerless govt, how could I also want it to shut down free speech?

                  I merely want to convince you and others that it is better for our community to talk about things that unite us rather than divide us.

                  Marxism is about deconstructing what we have now and rebuilding it in the Utopian socialist model.

                  All the “isms” are designed to break us into groups and have us fighting among ourselves and weaken us.

                  Look at all the special interest groups that exist today and that were once unnecessary. We were homogenous and strong in our defence of individual liberty.

                  The growth of Frankfurt School ideology has destroyed that. The wants of the community (so called) frequently over ride the rights of the individual, and we pay the price for this in a rapidly declining civilisation where drugs, violence, crime and family breakdown are much more prevalent than ever before.

                  Ask Kelvin about liberty. I bet he goes cross-eyed.

                  The emphasis is all wrong.

          • amirite 1.1.1.1.5
            23 April 2014 at 12:50 pm

            Redbaiter – Delusional much? Your views belong to the dustbin of history more like.

      • You_Fool 1.1.2
        23 April 2014 at 11:46 am

        Ahh yes, National, the party of all working class people everywhere, with their worker friendly ideology and policies. Not once do National take the chance to make the life of the working class and downtrodden worse or harder. When it comes time to divide up the cake it is national who ensure that the working class get their fair share! Yes I see that National is indeed the party for the lower classes and that labour is but for those who are out of touch and only out for themselves.

      • Jenny 1.1.3
        23 April 2014 at 5:16 pm

        Is that really you Bedwetter?

        • Jenny 1.1.3.1
          25 April 2014 at 4:59 am

          Hey Bedwetter, did you get your stomach stapleing operation done on the public socialistic system or did you go private?

  2. Not Petey 2
    23 April 2014 at 10:33 am

    For a self progressed Green voter you sure do push labour a lot Karol.

    • karol 2.1
      23 April 2014 at 10:43 am

      Sometimes. Depends on the issue. Sometimes I’m critical. Shows I’m open to deciding on matters according to the issues and principles.

      Jones’ resignation is hardly bad news for the Greens.

    • You_Fool 2.2
      23 April 2014 at 11:47 am

      I didn’t realise that being a Green voter meant that you had to hate on Labour all the time.. I guess I have also been doing things wrong…

  3. Enough is Enough 3
    23 April 2014 at 10:37 am

    If a progressive govermnet had to choose between Davis and Jones, there would be no contest. Davis wins every time.

    This is a win win for the left.

    Jones was a disaster. His constant attacking of the Greens showed he was in the wrong party and signalled to the electorate that a future Green/Labour alliance could be problematic.

    Now that he has gone we will hopefully see Labour embrace the Greens and move forward together. This will be alot more achievable with Davis in and Jones out.

    • Not Petey 3.1
      23 April 2014 at 10:40 am

      If Davis is so good.. and I agree he certainly is.. why was he so far down the labour list.

      • karol 3.1.1
        23 April 2014 at 10:45 am

        It’ll be interesting to see where he is on the List this election.

      • mickysavage 3.1.2
        23 April 2014 at 11:23 am

        He was not “far down” on Labour’s list. It is just that the result last time was disappointing. Many good people missed out like Kelvin and Carmel Sepuloni to name only two.

        • Sacha 3.1.2.1
          23 April 2014 at 11:33 am

          Nice try. He was ranked well below some far less talented candidates, and no explanation was ever offered for that. Admit it was a stuff-up and welcome the man back.

          • Te Reo Putake 3.1.2.1.1
            23 April 2014 at 11:49 am

            I’ve got an explanation; Goff, Shearer, Mallard, Jones and the rest of the ABCers.

            • BM 3.1.2.1.1.1
              23 April 2014 at 12:17 pm

              More like:

              Sue Moroney
              Nanaia Mahuta
              Darien Fenton
              Moana Mackey
              Rajen Prasad
              Raymond Huo
              Carol Beaumont

              That’s some serious lack of talent there.

              • mickysavage …
                23 April 2014 at 12:56 pm

                Do you and rolfcopter get the same instructions? Your comments are remarkably similar.

                Besides the list was finished at a time when Labour was polling over 30% in the opinion polls and if that result had occurred this would all be academic.

                • Enough is Enough …
                  23 April 2014 at 1:56 pm

                  Why do you get so defensive? The fact they have a common view does not mean they have “instructions”. We on the left think the same a lot of the time but don’t act on anyones instructions.

                  I for one agree. I think Kelvin was a rising star in the last caucus and regardless of whether Labour won 27% or 50% had a stange list place at the election. He has leadership skills and should have been sitting in or around the 20 mark.

                  He had and has much more to offer in the future then Mallards Moroneys and Mahutas.

                  Thanksfully he is back now.

              • ffloyd …
                23 April 2014 at 8:14 pm

                Bm I would like to see you come up against Sue Mooney in a debate. She’d have you for breakfast. What is your talent? Sweet FA I would guess.

            • Not Petey 3.1.2.1.1.2
              23 April 2014 at 1:28 pm

              Fair call .. who does decide on the list rankings is it caucus or the wider party ?

        • Murray Olsen 3.1.2.2
          23 April 2014 at 9:40 pm

          Carmel Sepuloni would have got in if Mana hadn’t stood in that seat. She would have been a plus for the wider left. Kelvin should not stand directly against Hone, because having both of them elected is a plus for the wider left. They probably also shouldn’t stand against Annette Sykes, and they should respect the Green Party a lot more. I’m reasonably sure there are electorates where Green and Labour don’t need to both stand. I’m 100% sure that Green shouldn’t make all the sacrifices either. If anything, Labour and the country owe them for being the opposition during the Shearer period, and to some extent, right up to the present.

          Also on my wish list – Bradbury and Trotter could just shut up. At least when the egg hatching guy speaks, people know what side he’s on.

          • weka 3.1.2.2.1
            23 April 2014 at 10:37 pm

            Labour would apparently prefer to remain in opposition than give concessions. The GP also is against concessions, but with them it makes more sense given how they’ve been treated in the past. Both of them are daft though, and it may cost the left the election (that and the Super policy)

            • Murray Olsen 3.1.2.2.1.1
              23 April 2014 at 11:34 pm

              I have the distinct impression that they consider Kiwi politics is owned by them and National, with everyone else being a Hone come lately who don’t really deserve any real consideration. This feeds into a worry that they will sooner or later go into a grand alliance with National – a government of national unity to preserve NZ Inc against any changes. I could easily see this happening if the Green and Mana share of the vote went up much over 20%. Of course, they would invite the real traitors, such as the Family Frolics Party, to participate. It’d probably cause a split in Labour and be the end of that party, but what good are they at the moment anyway?

  4. Rogue Trooper 4
    23 April 2014 at 10:50 am

    Excellent, and a helpful introduction to the man karol.

  5. Pete George 5
    23 April 2014 at 10:52 am

    Davis coming back would be one of the few positives from Jones’ exit, but will he get in before the election?

    @GraemeEdgeler

    As there is less than 6 months until the election, the House of Representatives can vote not to replace Shane Jones when he retires.

    • karol 5.1
      23 April 2014 at 11:00 am

      That would look particularly nasty if that got a majority vote, especially as National is perceived to have had a hand in getting Jones’ resignation. It would also mean that ACT, the Maori Party or peter Dunne would need to vote against Davis taking the job.

      • veutoviper 5.1.1
        23 April 2014 at 11:22 am

        Karol, re Edgeler’s advice, as this was a tweet, he did not include the fact that the vote not to replace requires a 75% (not 50+%,) majority, under section 136(a) of the Electoral Act 1993. so IMO it is unlikely to go to the vote.

        • karol 5.1.1.1
          23 April 2014 at 11:28 am

          Ah. that explains why it has not been mentioned in the media.

          • veutoviper 5.1.1.1.1
            23 April 2014 at 11:37 am

            Presumably.

            IMO, National is unlikely to seek that vote to not replace, not only because of the 75% majority required, but also because it could immediately open them to criticisms that their offer to Jones WAS a political manouvre to weaken Labour and the opposition close to the election.

            PS – I note the ‘fact checker extraordinaire’ did not bother to check the full details of the law on this before simply quoting Edgeler’s tweet!

      • Pete George 5.1.2
        23 April 2014 at 11:30 am

        I’ve asked Graeme “Are there precedents on this? Voting against the norm may not be a good look.”

        @GraemeEdgeler

        There have been list resignations in last six months, but they’ve never not been replaced. It makes no sense for it to happen.

        Of course you should replace. It’s not like there’s the expense of a by-election.

        I agree on that. Seems like a moot point he originally made.

        • Lanthanide 5.1.2.1
          23 April 2014 at 11:55 am

          I don’t think he was “making a point”, merely pointing out how the law applies to this situation.

  6. Roflcopter 6
    23 April 2014 at 10:53 am

    Good bloke, ol’ Davis, will do a top job for the North.

    Tell us again… why did Labour have him so far down the list?

    • mickysavage 6.1
      23 April 2014 at 11:33 am

      Is this the latest right wing spin line we are going to see all day? Kelvin Davies was far down the list blah blah blah …

      As I previously said the result was disappointing and many good candidates missed out.

      • Roflcopter 6.1.1
        23 April 2014 at 12:00 pm

        Never seen a good reason as to why he was rated lower than the following (in 2011)….

        Ruth Dyson
        Maryan Street
        Clayton Cosgrove
        Sue Moroney
        Charles Chauvel
        Nanaia Mahuta
        Jacinda Ardern
        Andrew Little
        Su’a William Sio
        Darien Fenton
        Moana Mackey
        Rajen Prasad
        Raymond Huo
        Carol Beaumont

        Call it “disappointing”, but Labour should have planned for the worst, and worked for the best… they didn’t, unfortunately for Kelvin he will be seen as a “emergency gap-filler”, when in fact he’s a lot more than that, and a lot better than all those listed above.

        Same could be said for Stuart Nash.

        • Te Reo Putake 6.1.1.1
          23 April 2014 at 12:03 pm

          You obviously missed my comment above. It’s 2014 now, move on.

        • karol 6.1.1.2
          23 April 2014 at 12:06 pm

          Actually, I think Labour are very fortunate to have someone with parliamentary experience to step in at short notice – and someone who was already planning to leave his job in June to start campaigning for the election.

        • mickysavage 6.1.1.3
          23 April 2014 at 12:57 pm

          Do you and BM get the same instructions? Your comments are remarkably similar.

          Besides the list was finished at a time when Labour was polling over 30% in the opinion polls and if that result had occurred this would all be academic.

          • Roflcopter 6.1.1.3.1
            23 April 2014 at 1:22 pm

            Looks like BM was being far more gracious with some MP’s than I am.

            Anyways, the proof will be in the pudding…. the pudding being the 2014 party list.

            If Kelvin’s list position is marginal again, then all the rhetoric around him being awesome for the left is nothing but a slap in the face of him and lip-service to all those he represents. He’s not going to win his seat.

          • Shazzadude 6.1.1.3.2
            25 April 2014 at 2:14 am

            It doesn’t matter mickysavage, the fact remains that Kelvin Davis was ranked below several less talented candidates. If the list was ranked according to talent, Kelvin would’ve been safely in even if Labour got just 20%.

    • greywarbler 6.2
      23 April 2014 at 3:07 pm

      Why don’t you go to Labour direct Rofl? You keep asking unimportant questions as if we know. But then you don’t really care what the answer is. You just want to make a sly point and seem to be interested.

  7. outofbed 7
    23 April 2014 at 11:18 am

    What is best for the left is not to stand a candidate against Hone
    Hone getting his seat might well be the difference in getting a progressive Government.

    I won’t be holding my breath.

    • karol 7.1
      23 April 2014 at 12:09 pm

      Well, I certainly would prefer to see both Haawira and Davis in the House. But it will be up to the Te Tai Tokerau electorate. I think it’s better to educate the electorate on the alternatives than not stand candidates. Standing in an electorate is an important way to also campaign for the party vote.

      Davis said in the First Line interview that he would be campaigning for two ticks in the electorate, plus for the party vote in the wider region of Northland.

  8. Pete George 8
    23 April 2014 at 12:44 pm

    Kelvin Davis in a Morning Report interview:

    But I have to say one of the big things that I want to achieve in Parliament is to raise the awareness and help to stop violence of any sort – sexual, physical, emotional violence — against our women and children. This was brought on by the Roastbusters scandal and the sexual abuse that’s been going on in the far north.

    And I’ve been sitting here thinking for the last couple of months that if I should get back into Parliament I really want to make a stand and make a difference and say this is how we as males need to behave towards our women.

    That’s something very pertinent to Te Tai Tokerau, and to the whole country. I wish Kelvin success in this, but first wish him well on getting a decent list position this time. (Note to Labour: don’t bank on increasing your numbers).

    • mickysavage 8.1
      23 April 2014 at 1:21 pm

      Pete you are repeating the right wing attack line of Kelvin not being given a high enough list placing. Tell me what list number were you given on United Future’s list?

      • Roflcopter 8.1.1
        23 April 2014 at 1:23 pm

        What the hell has that got to do with it?

      • Pete George 8.1.2
        23 April 2014 at 1:31 pm

        It’s not a right wing attack line, it was a bloody ballsup by Labour. Don’t tell me that whoever drew up the list order didn’t consider various election outcomes.

        Besides the list was finished at a time when Labour was polling over 30% in the opinion polls and if that result had occurred this would all be academic.

        Relying on polls? That’s a bit risky isn’t it?

        To be safe (ish) this time see if Kelvin can be put in the top 20.

        • karol 8.1.2.1
          23 April 2014 at 2:57 pm

          Well, balls up or not, it’s worked out well for Labour. not only do they have an experienced and competent politician to replace Jones, pretty quickly. But they also have someone to step up in the Labour Maori caucus.

          • Pete George 8.1.2.1.1
            23 April 2014 at 3:09 pm

            As far as the replacement goes it could hardly be any better for Labour. I prefer Davis to Jones.

            But Jones exit and Labour’s handling of it has been quite damaging in the short term at least.

            • karol 8.1.2.1.1.1
              23 April 2014 at 3:15 pm

              Actually, it’s the media’s handling that has been over the top and focused on the negatives.

              Labour actually responded pretty quickly and positively. Moria Coatesworth was oN RNZ within an hour responding to it. Cunliffe was on TV within a couple of hours on Henry’s show, talking about it. This is in spite of the MSM spin that Labour wasn’t responding for several hours after the 6pm news.

              Davis has hit the ground running today, and apart from Cosgrove’s McCaw line, the Labour caucus have been all positive about Jones contribution, his decision, and Davis as replacement.

      • Pete George 8.1.3
        23 April 2014 at 1:36 pm

        Tell me what list number were you given on United Future’s list?

        It was academic, I wasn’t expected to get in on the list, not surprising as I’d only been in the party a month or two when they did it. I wasn’t a current respected MP like Kelvin who had already contested two elections (one a by-election). There’s a wee bit of a difference.

    • Papa Tuanuku 8.2
      23 April 2014 at 6:38 pm

      lol ‘our women’. well, its not funny but he contradicts himslef. Women are not ‘ours’.

      • Te Reo Putake 8.2.1
        23 April 2014 at 9:39 pm

        Yes, they are, in the sense that their welfare is a collective responsibility. Same for kids.

        • felix 8.2.1.1
          24 April 2014 at 9:26 am

          “Our” and “my” are indeed words that indicate ownership or belonging.

          It’s sad that some people have become so individualistic and selfish that they can only understand belonging in the context of something belonging to an individual rather than as meaning the individual is part of something larger.

  9. Chooky 9
    23 April 2014 at 3:32 pm

    Kelvin looks very handsome….us Chooks may yet vote Labour now that Shane has gone off with his firends

  10. BEATINGTHEBOKS 10
    23 April 2014 at 10:11 pm

    Ok deep breath to all radicals on all sides. Jones has gone he was a great leveler for the working class male, white or brown working man. He didn’t attract the labour woman vote no doubt. But labour still needs that working class white or brown male vote. If it does not address this labour will die. The average voter only sees in the labour vote , feminist, gay, and pointless academic policies, a man or woman on a factory line cannot relate to these groups ( brown or white or conservative christian). IMHO none of these are bad, but they are over represented in the party when compared with the electorate ( feminist gay or academic). This will scare off the traditional labour vote, and it is disappointing. You have to be smart think what is the labour demographic. The current labour must do this before it dies. Otherwise the nats will take a lot of votes off what should have been the core of labour very easily. In response to any critics and radicals, just wait and see what the electorate delivers at election time if these issues are not addressed.

    • Chooky 10.1
      23 April 2014 at 10:40 pm

      @ Beatingtheboks

      Ok I agree you have a point.( Labour does look like a middle class party)…in the past Labour with Helen Clark attracted the 50% women vote…but they cant count on them now

      Who would you suggest can fill this role as a working class male magnet in the Labour Party?…..a public supporter identifier along with Cunliffe?….to fill out the worker male profile needed ?…Kelvin Davis?….or a selection of Labour males ?

      How would one remedy the problem you pose?…….does it come from Cunliffe top- down ….or rank and file referendum?

      I also see a problem as to who is going to go up against Paula Bennett…Jacinda Adern ( softly spoken white middle class ) just doesnt cut the mustard imo as spokesperson/debater……ie Labour needs a strong articulate working class woman or male voice that has an identifiable “I have been there and know what you are talking about” persona….eg Poto Williams …but how do you get the right person into that position before the Election?

      ….Does there need to be a purge as in the National caucus?…or at very least a rearranging of the front spokespeople for Labour so that it looks like a Party with fire in its belly?

  11. kiwigunner 11
    24 April 2014 at 7:50 am

    Davis though, like many in Labour right now, still harbours neo liberal desires. Many educators would be fearful of his love of National Standards for example. I’m guessing that the Charter School thing wouldn’t be out of the question with Kelvin either.

    • Chooky 11.1
      24 April 2014 at 8:23 am

      @kiwigunner …that is good information!….can he be persuaded to change his mind?…otherwise he could be a liability to Labour and New Zealand educators and New Zealand education

      …he needs to be inundated with what is happening in the USA….what NZ education academics in the universities think

      …if he still holds the same views ….then one has to wonder if he is genuine

      …he will need to be exposed on these views

    • Te Reo Putake 11.2
      24 April 2014 at 8:30 am

      Chooky, it’s not information, it’s a smear.

      “Charter Schools are therefore an extremely pointless and expensive strategy. There are still 40 strategies that are deemed pointless, but, are still more effective than Charter Schools.”

      Kelvin Davis (writing about Prof Hattie’s research).

      Edit: And this:

      “I believe there are things that we can do that are out of the box that will improve Maori education, certainly National Standards is not one of them. We showed at Kaitaia Intermediate that massive improvements in Maori achievement can occur in a short space of time, with the right personnel and the right attitude. The biggest part of the right attitude is not accepting failure.” Kelvin Davis.

      • Chooky 11.2.1
        24 April 2014 at 9:15 am

        Thanks TR E

        …however I think maybe Kelvin Davis should be invited as a guest poster here/ or else just be encouraged to to state on Open Mike clearly what he stands for as regards New Zealand education, Charter Schools and National Standards

        ….if it is a misconception/smear of his views …. it will be put right from the ‘horses mouth’ so to speak….and he could be a leader for New Zealand education and in the Labour Party….

        …i think there are many here who would like to get to know him and his views

  13. Jenny 13
    25 April 2014 at 5:24 am

    Of Hone Harawira and Kelvin Davis, you say karol that:

    “It would be good to see them working together in a Labour-led government.”

    This would represent a refreshingly non-sectarian approach for Labour and something that those on the Left would rightly celebrate.

    But will they do it?

    It all depends on two two things; 1# Just how sincere Labour is in wanting to replace National in government, and 2#, how willing Labour strategists would be to do an Epsom like deal in Te Tai Tokerau.

    The big question karol is whether, now that Kelvin Davis is guaranteed a place in parliament he is prepared to do a Paul Goldsmith?

    The word around the traps is that Labour intends to take Te Tai Tokerau off Hone Harawira, come hell or high water and will use all resources they can to do so. Even at the cost of a National victory.

    If this is true, then what this shows is that Labour puts sectarian advantage above ousting National.

    That Labour are prepared to lose the election to see off a perceived threat on their Left.

    That Labour’s real enemy is not the Right represented by National, but the Left represented by both Mana and by implication the Greens.

    • karol 13.1
      25 April 2014 at 6:49 am

      National still stands a candidate in Epsom. Ditto Labour. Ultimately, it’s about educating voters.

      Unlike Jones, Davis will follow Labour’s party lines.

      If voters want Hone and Kelvin, they can make that choice.

  14. Jenny 14
    25 April 2014 at 1:25 pm

    “National still stands a candidate in Epsom. Ditto Labour. Ultimately, it’s about educating voters.”
    karol

    Indeed karol, indeed.

    But I think you are being a bit disingenuous here.

    There is a difference between standing in a seat and seeking the list vote, to actively campaigning for electoral votes. In Epsom the Mana candidate was (apart from Goldsmith) the only one to actively ask Epsom voters not to vote for him.

    In 2011 we saw Right wing pro-mine it, drill it, frack it, MP, David Parker close friend of Shane Jones, fly up from Dunedin to Auckland to campaign for electorate votes in Epsom.

    While the National candidate Paul Goldsmith refused to campaign for the electoral vote. (even caught on camera pulling down his own signs, erected by his helpful/unhelpful supporters in lieu of his own refusal to put any election hoardings up.)

    The tandem mirror act between Goldsmith and Parker ensured ACT’s John Banks’ victory in Epsom, despite the majority of Epsom voters voting against him. (Combined the vote for Goldsmith, Parker and the Green’s David Hay outnumbered Banks total by over 3,000 votes)

    According to Marama Davis, David Hay of the Greens was campaigning for the electorate vote in Epsom, in defiance of the decided Green Party strategy for Epsom. An act of disloyalty for which David Hay was later punished for by being dropped off the Green Party list.

    (In contrast Labour’s David Parker was promoted by Labour to deputy Leader of the Labour Party.)

    With the benefit of hindsight:

    If David Parker and Kelvin Davis do a repeat act of 2011 and campaign for electorate votes in Epsom and Te Tai Tokerau respectively, then we will know for sure that Labour is just not that interested in turning back the neoliberal tide and getting rid of National, but more interested in keeping the Greens and Mana out of parliament. (Even if it means that Labour itself also wind up sitting on the opposition benches for another three years.)

    http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/03/09/the-one-nose-holding-electorate-for-progressive-voters-the-strategy-to-win-2014/

  15. Jenny 15
    25 April 2014 at 2:18 pm

    Going back to Te Tai Tokerau and Kelvin Davis, Kelvin Davis has been up to now running an aggressive campaign against Hone Harawira.

    One of the things that Kelvin has been recently proclaiming on Marae in the North is that Hone Harawira has achieved nothing from his time in parliament.

    But when you look at the record you find that this is far from true.

    During his time in parliament it was Hone Harawira who began the current campaign against smoking in particular the harm it has done to Maori. This campaign has recently culminated in legislation before the house about plain packaging at point of sale.

    It was Hone Harawira that made it Maori Party policy to remove GST off fresh fruit and vegetables, his campaign embarrassed the Labour Party to reluctantly make it Labour Party policy as well. (Though they have recently overturned it.)

    It was Hone Harawira and the Mana Party that made childhood poverty an election issue in 2011, before they raised it, it was a non-issue. The Mana Party “Feed the Kids” campaign has got wide support across the political spectrum.

    Now that Kelvin Davis is in parliament, (thanks to Shane Jones defection to National), and no longer needs to oust Hone Harawira to get a seat, will Davis stop his attack campaign based on false hoods against Harawira?

    • Te Reo Putake 15.1
      25 April 2014 at 2:25 pm

      “One of the things that Kelvin has been recently proclaiming on Marae in the North is that Hone Harawira has achieved nothing from his time in parliament.”

      Any evidence for this claim, Jenny?

      • Jenny 15.1.1
        26 April 2014 at 2:28 am

        As I wrote, he has been “saying” it. It was related to me by fluent Maori speakers who I trust. But why take my word for it.

        Why not ask Kelvin.

        Anyway my point is that I hope this vicious and sectarian infighting is a thing of the past, and that you would agree with me TRP that getting rid of National is more important than getting rid of Hone Harawira. And that having Harawira in parliament is more likely to achieve that outcome, than not.

        • Te Reo Putake 15.1.1.1
          26 April 2014 at 7:57 am

          That’s weak, Jenny. You’re the one being sectarian by spreading untruths. Like it or not we live in a democracy and the people of Te Tai Tokerau are entitled to exercise their choice. Labour will stand candidates in every seat, as we always do. The people will decide the outcome. Good luck to Hone, but don’t expect gossip to decide the outcome.

          • Jenny 15.1.1.1.1
            26 April 2014 at 9:45 am

            TRP you are avoiding the issue. Let me be blunt. Do you think getting rid of Hone is more important than getting rid of National?

            • Te Reo Putake 15.1.1.1.1.1
              26 April 2014 at 9:59 am

              Actually, the issue is you spreading unsubstantiated gossip. But, to answer your question, I’m in favour of democracy. Let the people decide.

              • Jenny …
                26 April 2014 at 11:27 am

                ” But, to answer your question, I’m in favour of democracy. Let the people decide.”
                Te Reo Putake

                I also am in favour of democracy and letting the people decide.

                Unfortunately, the MMP system we have in the country is not fully representative, and the 5% threshold and the electorate candidate exemption allows distortions to creep in. Distortions that the Right are just to happy to exploit.

                By making the bland statement above you are again avoiding the issue and you know it.

                I’ll ask you again:

                Do you think getting rid of Hone is more important than getting rid of National?

                • Jenny …
                  26 April 2014 at 10:54 pm

                  According to lprent when these “Tribal Labour” sectarians refuse to be drawn, or refuse to answer a straight question, whether it is on climate change or any other subject, it is not a sign of their intentions. Maybe Lynn is right.

                  And of course actions always speak louder than words. So if Kelvin Davis does go all out for electorate votes in Te Tai Tokerau. And David Parker goes all out for votes in Epsom.

                  We will have our answer….

                  LABOUR WOULD RATHER BE IN OPPOSITION THAN SHARE POWER WITH THE GREENS AND/OR MANA

              • Jenny …
                27 April 2014 at 3:33 am

                The Voice Of Reason* is not the only Labour Party ‘supporter’ to go silent on the question of whether a National Government would be more preferable than a Labour/Green/Mana government.

                …when asked whether a Labour-Greens government would be preferable to a National government, he avoided the question.

                Mr Jones will leave his job as a Labour MP in a month and it seems until then he will take every opportunity to attack Labour’s closest ally, the Greens.

                “I just felt the Kaupapa the Greens were bringing forward, I always felt it was too anti-industry,” he says. “I’m just not going to fight that fight anymore. If that’s the way they want to run the country then I’ve had enough of it.”

                He stopped just short of attacking his soon-to-be-former colleagues.

                “I never said anything disloyal about my senior colleagues or David Cunliffe, but I’ve got every right to reflect what I think is a problem with New Zealand politics if we don’t challenge some of the orthodoxy that comes out of the Green merchants.”

                Mr Jones says he still supports Labour, but when asked twice whether he would prefer Labour-Greens government over third-term National government, he did not give a clear answer.

                “My views are now irrelevant, so that question you need to direct in the future to the New Zealand voters, and that’s about all I’ve got to say.”

                Mr Jones’s line about the Greens being anti-Industry sounded like it could have come straight from the National Party, and they were quick to put out a press release supporting Mr Jones’s view.

                “His best-case scenario, if Labour got elected, would be to be the Economic Development Minister in a Labour-Greens government, and that would be a government which is anti-economic development and I can understand why he’d say, ‘Thanks but no thanks, I’ll do something else,'” says National MP Steven Joyce.

                Mr Jones still has about a month left in the job. Every time he talks to the media he causes more damage to the Labour Party.

                Rachel Morton TV3 News

                Read more: http://www.3news.co.nz/Shane-Jones-Greens-are-anti-industry/tabid/1607/articleID/341606/Default.aspx#ixzz300EXtbRW

                *The Voice of Reason changed his online name to Te Reo Putake following the 2012 Ports of Auckland strike and lockout. See why HERE

                Postscript:

                Compare the words of Shane Jones with those of Te Reo Putake.

                “….to answer your question, I’m in favour of democracy. Let the people decide.” TRP

                “….so that question you need to direct in the future to the New Zealand voters, and that’s about all I’ve got to say.” SJ

                You have to wonder if these views are very wide spread inside the Labour Party. If Labour lose this election we will know why. Their hearts weren’t really in it.

                • karol …
                  27 April 2014 at 6:40 am

                  I think you are doing what you blame others for, Jenny – spreading misinformation and stirring up conflict on the left. TRP’s statements on democracy do not equate to preferring a Nat government to Hone in government.

                • Te Reo Putake …
                  27 April 2014 at 10:01 am

                  I have never changed my online name, Jenny. On Waitangi day a couple of years ago I decided to use the te reo spelling instead of the English.

      • felix 15.1.2
        26 April 2014 at 3:41 am

        In 2011 Kelvin and Labour fought really hard to win that seat. Dumb dumb dumb.

        I hope Jenny is wrong and they’ve learned to think in terms of what’s best for the left block and not treat the north as a pissing contest.

        • Jenny 15.1.2.1
          26 April 2014 at 9:22 am

          I also hope I am wrong. And that things have changed. Both in Epsom and in Te Tai Tokerau.

          The first indication will be if the notorious ABC member David Parker again comes up from Dunedin to stand in Epsom to ensure that ACT gets into parliament.

          Preventing both a Labour led government and a Cunliffe Prime Ministership.

  16. Marius 16
    25 April 2014 at 2:20 pm

    Whether by National limo or Labour taxi the destination is the same. Capitalism, like Communism, doesn’t work. Next.

  17. ianmac 17
    25 April 2014 at 2:37 pm

    Oops. Put this on Open Mike. Better here:
    A good opening comment from Kelvin Davis in the Herald ex Northern Advocate – Mike Dinsdale.
    “Mr Davis, who spent one term as a Labour list MP, said he would push several key issues when back in the House – Maori education, regional development, improving the number of people speaking te reo Maori, and “being the male in Parliament who stands up and says enough is enough over domestic violence”.
    And “…after missing out by 832 votes to Hone Harawira in the Te Tai Tokerau electorate race in the 2011 election …”
    Do I barrack for Hone or for Kelvin? Aye. There’s the rub.
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11244080

    • greywarbler 17.1
      25 April 2014 at 2:51 pm

      What to do? The shades of Shakespeare writhe and groan.
      http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/36560-to-be-or-not-to-be-that-is-the-question

      “To be, or not to be: that is the question:
      Whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer
      The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
      Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
      And by opposing end them?….

      and more –
      For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,
      The oppressor’s wrong, the proud man’s contumely,
      The pangs of despised love, the law’s delay,
      The insolence of office and the spurns
      That patient merit of the unworthy takes,
      When he himself might his quietus make
      With a bare bodkin? who would fardels bear,
      To grunt and sweat under a weary life

      So think on your bodkins and fardels – for who knows wot of the future? Maybe that Labour will indulge in mental strain and find a path for the pilgrim’s progress.

      • Jenny 17.1.1
        26 April 2014 at 9:34 am

        That is indeed the question. (And thanks to the bard.) Where National seem to have no problem assisting Right support parties into government, Labour seem to have some sort of mental block.

        With the election result projected to be very close, Labour will have to lose this mental block and open their eyes to the realities of MMP. If they don’t, and Labour keep to their clunky outmoded first past the post thinking, then the Nacts using strategic MMP tactics will have it all over Labour this election. (possibly even future elections, particularly if they are ever as close as this one will be.)

        For Labour to actively seek votes in Epsom and Te Tai Tokerau could be snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

        • karol 17.1.1.1
          27 April 2014 at 6:42 am

          I oppose National’s dirty deals – gaming the system. I have criticised it often, I don’t want to see the left stooping to their level.

          • Jenny 17.1.1.1.1
            27 April 2014 at 9:43 am

            “I oppose National’s dirty deals – gaming the system. I have criticised it often, I don’t want to see the left stooping to their level.”
            karol

            What!!

            Even at the cost of another National Government!?

            You surely don’t mean that?

            Surely you can’t be serious karol?

            Is this really your game plan?

            How about this….

            Why not get a Labour Green government into power and then then fix the iniquities in our MMP system?

            In the meantime, until then, we have to work with the system we have.

            To do less is a betrayal of those we purport to champion.

            With the polls showing the result will be very close, doing less is to concede defeat.

            With your above statement that is exactly what you are doing.

            “Gaming” the MMP system as you put it Karol, is not a matter of compromising on principle it is a tactical matter. Of course we would all like a full out frontal assault on National, but currently that is not the tactical position we are in. In war when the choice is between using a tactical approach or retreating, a commander who refuses to use strategy and tactics to advance is demoted, in war the cost of not doing so is measured in lives. In politics the cost is measured in peoples welfare and their children’s future. (and indirectly in lives)

            Karol being all pure and virtuous will not help the people and the planet, or those being driven further down at the bottom of society by this government for the benefit of the polluters and plutocrats.

            Examine your conscience, can you really afford your holier than thou attitude?

            Can our supporters really afford another three years of National? Can the climate?

            Karol I think you need to harden up and get serious. As long as people like you are not serious about winning, no one can take you seriously.

            I think you need to take a really hard look into your heart and ask is a National Government what we really want for another three years?

            If you do so, and you see that the answer is no! Then you must be determined to use every means at your disposal to get rid of them. As I said before the Right have no such scruples!

  18. Jenny 18
    27 April 2014 at 10:47 am

    ‘

    “Those who love peace must learn to organise as effectively as those who love war”

    Martin Luther King Jr