Showing posts with label opinionistas. Show all posts
Showing posts with label opinionistas. Show all posts

5 Nov 2013

Musings on the 2013 Labour Conference

 The Line in the Sand

As noted earlier, this conference should be seen as “The Line in the Sand” conference rather than, as has been painted by the opinionistas, an inward looking navel gaze by a Party more interested in itself than in politics and governance.
Cunliffe’s speech was designed to clearly articulate the points of difference between Labour and the neo-liberal National-ACT party while the Party, as a whole, determined that the principles on which these differences are based are clearly articulated in the Party’s policy framework.

What has escaped the opinionistas is that the Policy Framework is the document against which all manifesto and policy directions must be referenced. It is designed to limit and prevent policy inconsistencies developing. This means that, unlike PinoKeyo, who makes up “facts and figures” and invents policy on the hoof when ever he is cornered or faced with a trade off in return for a promise of a possible reward from a Casino, a film company or smelter company, the Labour Party MPs will have a common reference point and position that will ensure that Labour has a consistent message and policy direction.

Cunliffe’s speech and the policy announcements on a Living Wage, on Housing, on KiwiAssure ( a return to the old State Insurance Company once a jewel in the government’s treasury) and the Christchurch rebuild must be seen as reflections of the coherent policy framework the Conference refined and endorsed over the last weekend.

Because the Conference was essentially a constitutional one the Party also refined its constitutional principles and internal functioning to best reflect both the make up of the Party and the political environment created by MMP. While the decisions may affect the representation of Men, Women and Ethnic groups offered on the Party list and those standing as candidates in Electorates it does not and will not affect the ability of the Party, when in Government, to govern responsibly and effectively.

The reaction of the opinionistas who refer to the constitutional decisions as a “man ban” would appear to be endorsing a belief that the only “real representation” of New Zealand society and, therefore, effective governors, are white, affluent, conservative businessmen who “know” what the people need because they’re “self made men”. This is hardly a belief based on empirical evidence or which has any credibility since the recent economic crashes and the performances of both the UK Conservative Party or the US Republican Party.

The Conference and Cunliffe’s speeches were a signal that Labour will be governing for the mutual good of all members of the New Zealand society. That Labour will govern from sound, coherent and well considered principles and values that have been developed from consultation and endorsed by the wider membership and not by a committee appointed by a few and responsible to no-one but themselves. They also signal a return to the values based on a mutual regard and concern for all who contribute to society and away from the neo-liberal selfishness of the PinoKeyo National-ACT government.

15 Sept 2013

The New Labour Leadership


 DAVID CUNLIFFE ELECTED 

 NOW FOR A REAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN


The Leader of the New Zealand Labour Party - David Cunliffe
 After an intensive campaign for the Leadership of the Labour Party, fought between three strong, ariculate and well informed candidates, David Cunliffe, Grant Robertson and Shane Jones,  the membership of the New Zealand Labour Party elected, on first preference votes, David Cunliffe to the position.
The election results from the NZ Labour Party website


The result was, as predicted by the real constituency, decided by considerations other than the personality and sexuality politics posited as being "real" by the self appointed, self interviewing pundits like Patrick Gower, the ill informed and offensive right wing bloggers (much referred to by the opinionistas) the Bar room eaves-dropper Chris Trotter and the increasingly politically schizoid opinionistas writing for The Herald.

The Party membership voted for David Cunliffe for several reasons:

1) They wanted a Leader who has had long time experience in The House as a back bencher and as a Cabinet Minister with an established solid reputation.

2) They wanted a Leader with a demonstrable ability to organise and motivate a supportive campaign team that could transfer that organisation and expertise to the wider Party and thus reactivate the campaigning machine that Labour had honed and developed during the late 1970s and through the 1980s.

3) They wanted a Leader who was seen and heard to clearly articulate and present the policies and ideology of the Party without equivocation on the radio and television channels and whose comments would and could not be "misunderstood" by the opinionistas who dominate the NZ media.

4) They wanted a Leader who could communicate and connect with the membership across the spectrum - from the ordinary branch members, from the members representing the different ethnic groups, from the members in the affiliated Unions and on to the wider public.

5) The wanted a Leader who will not allow himself to be beaten down by over bearing, self opinionated TV " interviewers" who, following on in the tradition of Paul Holmes and Paul Henry, believe that an interview should be conducted between the interviewer and himself with the "interviewee" being merely a stage prop to be ridiculed and belittled.

6) They wanted a Leader who would and could take the fight to preserve the New Zealand society, the New Zealand social fabric, the New Zealand economy and the New Zealand tradition of supporting the aspirations of all regardless of social class, of income and of where they live to the floor of Parliament, to the hustings and to the public.

While all of the contenders demonstrated these abilities in various ways through out the Leadership campaigning it was David Cunliffe who demonstrated all of these qualities to the level expected by the Party Membership and for that he is to be congratulated.

Grant Robertson and Shane Jones have certainly demonstrated that there is a depth of talent and political aggression within the New Zealand Labour Party that has been, for too long, quiet and quiescient.

Now, let the real election campaign to rebuild New Zealand after two terms of"I'm quaite relacsshed about that" and behind closed doors questionable dealings government that has characterised the John PinoKeyo Key doublespeaking government.