Monday, July 22, 2019

ON KNOCKING OUT WINSTON

DPF over at Kiwiblog is running a post here arguing that National should rule out any deal with WRP come the next election.    I accept the argument that 'he' would be a destructive force in any National led government always threatening to throw his toys out of the cot.    Put simply, there's no trust between the National and Peters and I suspect the feeling is mutual.

But it's instructive the article focuses on Peters and not on NZF.    There are some good people in that Party and with a new leader things might be different.    The problem with that of course is the Peters is the leader and Peters is the Party and without him there might be no Party.

It's a very long odds bet that National could govern alone (with the support of ACT should National decide to continue their life support).   It assumes that both NZF and the Greens dip below the 5% cut-line threshold.   NZF may but I suspect the deluded Green Party support will hold up.

And that's National's problem in a nutshell.
 

26 comments:

James said...

Ok let’s look beyond Winston:

1. Tracey Martin - very much on the left wing of the party, with origins in Democrats for Social Credit, and being the daughter of Anne Martin, formerly a candidate for Social Credit and until recently party president of NZ First. Strongly tied to and leading one particular faction in NZF, more left wing than others. Not a natural fit for National, more comfortable with Labour.

2. Fletcher Tabateau, current deputy to Winston, both as party leader and in ministerial duties. Seems to be his anointed, and a long time party stalwart. Has stuck with Winston through thick and thin, may or may not share his total animosity towards National, but certainly shares his anti-free market viewpoints and in favour of protectionism and govt intervention in industry.

3. Ron Mark. Now focusing on his life long ambition to be minister of defence, in my opinion this will be his last duty as a politician. He is less interested in party politics, likely to do a term or two as minister before retiring.

4. Darroch Ball. Ron Mark’s protege. Was a NZ army officer for a few years, getting out as a Lieutenant in the Royal New Zealand Army Logistic Regiment in 2011. Very much in favour of expanding Limited Service Volunteer (LSV) scheme, and also coming out strongly on the right wing of the party in terms of his views in criminal justice. Seems to me more comfortable with National than Labour.

5. Shane Jones. Need more be said? Could go either way, who knows with this guy.

6 & 7. Clayton Mitchell and Mark Patterson I understand them to be close to Darroch Ball and Fletcher Tabuteau, more on the right wing of the party.

8. Jenny Marcoft. Seems to me more left wing and under the guidance of Tracey Martin and Shane Jones, bad blood exists between her and National after allegations she ‘bullied’ Mark Mitchell last year.

So even if Winston moves on from parliament, which I don’t think he’ll do any time soon, less than half NZF MPs (by my analysis) would lean towards National over Labour.

pdm said...

Never ever forget that Winston says the board will have the final say on which party NZFirst goes with.

Did we ever find out the names of those board members - mmmm thought not!!

Noel said...

That so pdm?
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/341390/who-s-deciding-nz-first-board-list-revealed

pdm said...

Thanks Noel - I cannot recall seeing that list before.

The Veteran said...

pdm ... I assume your comment wuz tongue in cheek. The NZF Board did do and will continue to do exactly what WRP tells them to do ... another leader and perhaps another story but, at this point of time, WRP is the Party, is the Party, is the Party.

Tom Hunter said...

And that's National's problem in a nutshell.

No mates, that's for sure.

But their second problem is that this is all advice. I don't think Bridges or National have to balls to do it. And why?

Power.

POWER.

The juicy opportunity to sit on Government benches, perhaps as a Government Minister. The old saying that a bad day in government is better than a good week in Opposition remains true. When push comes to shove these people will sell their souls for that chance - and Winston is a willing buyer who understands this shit in precisely the way he doesn't understand or care about legislating.

I was overseas when he joined with Bolger in 1996, but via Lefty friends I heard the screams from across the Pacific:
"Of course, National joined with this virulent racist, this scumbag. They're Right-wingers so it's a natural fit".

And so on and so forth.

In 2005 I heard not a fucking word from any of these old mates. A pin could have dropped, and when pressed the quiet response was that "Helen would deal with it".

I'd love Bridges to do this. But then I would have loved Bill English to do it as well.

But they were and are simply too afraid of losing a chance at power. Winston knows this and will chuckle all the way into the 2020 election.

Politics eh? :)

Kimbo said...

Sorry, but any who follows the mad cult of personality that is Winston First are not (to quote you) “good people”. The party will die with him, if not sooner with them being given the arse card in 2020, as in 2008, and as almost happened in 1999. Peters always over promises and under delivers to his single issue-driven senile malcontents and fruit cake supporters. Pike River ffs! Peters is a magnificent collector of protest votes, but due to his flaws and their insistence on being perpetually pissed off, he will never satisfy them when in government.

Also Peters will not go with National, but will only use them to leverage a better deal from Labour as he did in 2017. So better that the Nats boldly take charge of their own destiny and signal now to any who are tempted to vote for Peters but don’t want another government with Labour and the Greens that they should jump ship now.

If (as is very likely) NZ First fails to make 5% next time then it is a drag race between National and Labour/Greens. That is a doable and viable winning pathway to victory for National.

Psycho Milt said...

I was overseas when he joined with Bolger in 1996, but via Lefty friends I heard the screams from across the Pacific:

"Of course, National joined with this virulent racist, this scumbag. They're Right-wingers so it's a natural fit".


Funny, because I was on this side of the Pacific with a lot of lefty friends and don't recall anything like that at all. It would in any case have been a fairly odd thing for them to say, given the number of Māori MPs Peters brought with him into Parliament in 1996. Were your lefty friends strictly rhetorical ones, by any chance?

Kimbo said...

@ Psycho Milt

I cannot comment on whether Tom Hunter has friends, lefty or otherwise (although photographic evidence may exist of the two us sharing a beer, so I’ll vouch for him)

...but what the hell does the number of Maori MPs in the NZ First parliamentary intake of 1996 have to do with it not being racist?! Winston Peters’ campaign that year was the first time he rolled out the anti-immigration anti-Asian rhetoric. NZ hadn’t seen anything in politics as foul, base and naked since the days of RJ Seddon and the £50 poll tax to stop the “Yellow Peril”, or Orangeman William Massey and his anti-Irish Catholic campaign against Joseph Ward.

Maori, whether individually or collectively, share the same human nature that makes us all capable of racism. Indeed, in 1996 Peters achieved an interesting electoral fusion of two otherwise disparate groups of voters - Maori and elderly conservative Pakeha - who were both scared witless of his nonsense vision of the country being overrun by Chinese and Indians.

Sure, immigration should be just another public political policy we should all be able to discuss and decide at the ballot box. But Peters didn’t give a shit about responsible discourse. And nothing has changed. Like Trump he will say anything to get elected. Yet another reason why people who belong to, or vote for NZ First are not “good people”.

Lord Egbut Nobacon said...

Kimbo ...presumably the photographic evidence consists of a self portrait.

Kimbo said...

...or if one is charitable, some NZ First votes are, at best, most unwise. That’s a polite way of calling them stupid.

Psycho Milt said...

Maori, whether individually or collectively, share the same human nature that makes us all capable of racism. Indeed, in 1996 Peters achieved an interesting electoral fusion of two otherwise disparate groups of voters - Maori and elderly conservative Pakeha - who were both scared witless of his nonsense vision of the country being overrun by Chinese and Indians.

I think there are two things here:

1. For someone on the left, there's a difference between ordinary old ethnic bigotry and racism. For example, some Black South Africans under Apartheid may well have held very bigoted views about White people, but only the Whites were racist. Racism implies holding and taking advantage of a dominant position in society. Right-wingers tend to dismiss the concept, but Tom Hunter was talking about left-wingers in his comment.

2. It's not racist to want lower immigration into NZ, especially if we're getting a lot of immigrants with no interest in integrating into NZ culture and whose basis for getting permanent residence is that they can front up a lot of cash (something that applies to Americans, South Africans etc as much as it does to Chinese immigrants). Asian migrants in particular tend to lack interest in Māori culture or the meaning of the Treaty of Waitangi to NZ society, so it's unsurprising they'd be the focus of an anti-immigration party with a lot of Māori in it.

Kimbo said...

@ Psycho Milt

Gotcha. So what you are saying re Maori racism as per your response to Gravedodger on this thread:

https://nominister.blogspot.com/2019/07/another-rock-star-moment-ends-badly.html?showComment=1563783056329#c7204302429139875156

....is that is entirely* different?

* Kimbo’s law: in blogworld the validity of an argument is in inverse proportion to the use of emphatic adverbs.

Tom Hunter said...

Were your lefty friends strictly rhetorical ones, by any chance?
Now, now Psycho, just because you don't have any Righty friends - well aside from we here at NoMinister of course - that's no reason to project.

My Lefty friends were all made in the 1980's and although they were all well aware of the power+bigotry=Xism argument they didn't fully accept it. Apart from anything else it left a lot of vagueness about who really had the power - outside of blatant examples like the South African government, against which most of them marched.

No, for them a bigot was a bigot was a bigot. And of course all the subtlety of Labour's modern immigration approach stuff was decades away: for them any opposition to immigration was always just pure White xenophobia.

Hence their loathing of Winston Peters, which had started years earlier, and thus their anger in 1996.

Of course it may have been a simple sense of betrayal, since he'd gone around the country basically assuring people that a vote for Winston would be a vote to put an end to all that horrible Rogernomics stuff that National had continued with.

They would hardly have been alone. I recall clambering on board a Lufthansa flight from Berlin to London, seeing some TV coverage of a person being showered with flowers, realising with some surprise that I recognised the person as Helen Clarke, and concluding that she must have won the election. Only later did I learn the awful truth via my friends.

I admit that I laughed! Was that wrong of me!

Psycho Milt said...

"Entirely different" was a quote from Gravedodger's post, not a comment by me.

Psycho Milt said...

Hence their loathing of Winston Peters...

I'm certainly not a fan either, and there'd be few on the left who were. He's based his party consistently on bigotry and provincial conservatism, hence his consistent popularity with old white people. I don't recall any conversations like the ones you describe, though.

Kimbo said...

@ Psycho Milt

But nevertheless an accurate summation of your “Maori can be ordinary old ethnic bigots but not racists” argument. And what do you mean “left”? Not a perspective, say, Norman Kirk would have shared.

But yeah, I was aware of the “those without power cannot be racist” argument. First heard it peddled by that old spiritual and racist fraud, Canon Hone Kaa over 30 years ago in the presence of then-Race Relations Conciliator Wally Hirsch. Who covered the role with additional shame by not bitch-slapping Kaa down on the spot.

Bugger Marxist dialectics, Psycho. It was a bullshit argument then, just as it is now.

Tom Hunter said...

....hence his consistent popularity with old white people. I don't recall any conversations like the ones you describe, though.

That's surprising because the snark I got about him going with National follows quite naturally from the argument you've just given - which was my friends arguements also.

In fact I'm pretty sure I'd be able to find you slipping the knife in along the same lines on this blog:

Well, of course something as horrible as X is supported by National/The Right because,.... meh.

Lord Egbut Nobacon said...

Speculation, whadaboutery, convoluted sentences, odd moments happening 30 years ago and this supposed to have some bearing on today?

You are dancing on the head of a pin if you hope to persuade people of your argument but unfortunately nobody quite knows what your argument is.....it's just noise.

How about plain English or is that too much to ask?

Psycho Milt said...

Kimbo: I'm aware right-wingers dispute the left-wing view of racism. That's why I wrote "Right-wingers tend to dismiss the concept..."

Psycho Milt said...

Well, of course something as horrible as X is supported by National/The Right because,.... meh.

I assume there are comments by me along those lines. What counts is whether I had a good argument for them or not.

Kimbo said...

Eggie, the day this blog and the commentary on it gets dumbed down to your level is the day it deserves to die.

Kimbo said...

@ Psycho Mil

See, right there, where you assume I’m a right winger is where you went wrong. I’m not. A former member of the Labour Party who has become a centrist in my dottage (google it, Eggie!), but am in no way ashamed of why I was once a member and the values I still hold that prompted me to join. Like racism is racism is racism no matter who is practicing it.

And bugger your dialectic analysis (google it, Eggie!), be it class or race warfare.

Lord Egbut Nobacon said...

Kimbo....I am still trying to work out "bitch slapping" a term I'm unfamiliar with. Perhaps putting your thoughts across in simple New Zealand English would be helpful to those amongst us who do not have the benefit of a college education.

Kimbo said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Kimbo said...

Google is your friend, Eggie