Island Life: The Art of the Deal
86 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 Newer→ Last
-
In one of the polite political discussions in our house the other day, I pointed out that one of the reasons that National rejects the Maori seats is that for many, many years they were Labour seats, and under FPP, that was a problem (for National). But rather than seeing that as a problem to do with the seats, National should see it as a problem with their politics and policies. If the nature of National is that a large proportion of Maori reject National, then rather than rejecting Maori, National should take a long hard look at itself, and think about what changes it should be making in order to appeal to a larger proportion of Maori.
Maybe that's what John Key is doing.
-
I didn't say the Maori Party was GOING to make a clean sweep - I said they were LOOKING at making a clean sweep. The tide went out in those two seats as soon they started flirting with National. And these "consultative" hui seems to barely warrant the term, merely a one hour exercise in window dressing with the faithful.
And Deborah - all the Maori Party has done is given National the fig leaf it needs to claim it is centrist, whilst knowing that anything the Maori party baulks at ACT will vote for and vice-versa, and National clearly believes that over three years the corrosive attraction of the baubles of ministerial office will keep the Maori party onboard. After all, what does the National party care if Sharples and co are dumped at the next election in favour of Labour? It'll just reduce the electoral overhang that is against them anyway. It is win-win for National.
In terms of electoral realpolitik the Maori Party just signed their own death warrant.
-
Sorry Craig
The quotes were mostly because I couldn't think of quite the right word.
And very sorry for giving any impression that my comment was specifically about The Maori Party. Far from it. My comment (admittedly overly cynical) was aimed at them as politicians.
If I have any real disappointment in them it is that they are demonstrating that they are politicians wanting power rather than representing any constituency (not that I have any real knowledge of the real Maori constituency, if there is such a thing).
As I said, not aimed at Maori or the party as such, simply at the individuals in parliament.
cheers
Bart -
I really don't think Labour should assume that the MP will be toast because of this, or that voters will drift back to them any time soon. A lot of Māori are still livid about the seabed and foreshore issue, and they will have long memories. And let's not even mention the Tūhoe raids, and the role that Goff and King may or may not have played in them.
Added to that can be social and ideological changes in Māoridom itself. There are plenty of entrepreneurs who want to commercialize traditional Māori knowledge and many more who want some form of devolution. It could certainly be argued that an ACT-libertarian ideological framework could mesh with these implementations of te tino rangatiratanga. And what about Destiny Church? The advent of a socially conservative, right-leaning Māori Christianity certainly poses problems for the Labour, who've traditionally relied on the Labour-Ratana alliance.
These developments aren't happening in isolation. They stem from a feeling of neglect and stagnation, and part of that feeling reflects a sense of having been taken for granted by Labour. Labour need to come up with reasons why Māori should continue voting for them, rather than just assume the Labour-Māori affiliation is a natural state of affairs. It isn't; it's to some extent an historical accident. And Goff and King's elevation certainly won't help matters.
-
3410,
Maybe that's what John Key is doing.
I'm starting to think that Key might just be quite a smart cookie. If this term works out OK for Maori, they might not go back to Labour for a long time, and at very little cost to National.
-
I'm not sure if this is a good play by Goff.
Telling Maori Party MPs what their voters actually wanted them to do post-election, when the Maori Party made it fairly clear they might go with National pre-election.
A hint of colonial paternalism even?
-
As a lefty, I cannot understand this fuss being made of MP dealing with National - If they stay with the opposition, the left still dosent have the numbers to bring Nat-ACT down.
At least the MP can serve as a counterbalance to the rightwing of the Nats and ACT (and following Hide's rabid performance on election nmight, I am very worried)... -
This is going to be the fifth post-election deal under MMP.
Now it may be that the Maori Party will be the first minor party to retain its support at the next election, after backing the government of the time. But no party has managed it yet. I'd be interested to know why people think this time will be any different. Especially given the economic weather forecast.
There is a separate argument - the bee (or whatever insect it is) sting argument - you get one shot, and then you die, so you might as well make the most of your shot, and hope to leave a legacy. But that is *not* the same as saying that the party will benefit. Kiwibank is still here, but the Alliance isn't (just Jim). Ditto all other previous guests at the coalition table.
(Which brings up a third argument, about our simplistic "in or out" political culture, but enough already ...)
-
I must say I agee with page two of this thread a lot more than with page one... Great move by Key, and if it works for the country and for Maori he's sown up re-election in three years, forcing me to say "good on him".
And as a foaming at the mouth leftie, I'd add that on Saturday night I was looking at a Key-Dunne-Hide triumvirate, now it's a minority government in which the Act is more than counterbalanced by the Maori Party influence. In terms of the kind of constituencies that the gov would be serving, at least on paper (and we've got nothing else to go by) I'm a far happier chap right now.
-
So the first test will probably be law'n'order. The Maori Party will vote against legislation on sentencing and gangs, but ACT will provide the majority.
-
I am hopeful that the Maori Party getting into an arrangement with the Nats will lead to some positive outcomes (sorry about that) for Maoridom and a strengthening of the Maori Party itself. I have a reasonably high regard for Pita Sharples (esp when compared with Tariana Turia whom I took to be a bitter old curmudgeon but am happy to be persuaded otherwise ) and I would like to see some elements of the tiro rangatiratanga being put on the table.
Too many of the over-40 pakeha demographic (of which I am a part) demonise both Maori and the Maori Party mostly through a combination of ignorance and fear but I think that anything that helps to raise the tangata whenua into a true partnership in running this wonderful country would be a good thing.
And I would hope that the MP would exercise a restraining hand to prevent the Nats from drifting too far to the right, providing a counterbalanbce to the presence of ACT in the government. It may all be a cynical ploy by JohnKey and it may or may not pan out as he hopes but I. for one, am happy to see this development.
The MP would have been just sitting in the wilderness if they refused to co-operate with National - this way theu at least have some chance of making some progress for Maoridom and that has to be good for all of New Zealand/Aotearoa.
-
And as a foaming at the mouth leftie, I'd add that on Saturday night I was looking at a Key-Dunne-Hide triumvirate, now it's a minority government in which the Act is more than counterbalanced by the Maori Party influence. In terms of the kind of constituencies that the gov would be serving, at least on paper (and we've got nothing else to go by) I'm a far happier chap right now.
Yes, Giovanni. The KDH triumvarate was what scared me, as well. I'm quite pleased that Key has made the effort with the MP. It's a smart move on his part. I'm still shitting myself about this new Education Minister, Anne Tolley. No-one seems to know anything about her.
-
Can I just get the cash now instead of the herceptin?
I am in a high risk category (Mum, aunt & lots of female relations with breast cancer and I've never had children) but I'm still skeptical and my mate's mum had severe cardiac damage from it and barely survived. Also I don't trust drug campanies and media beat up. The women's Health Council wrote this.
-
It may all be a cynical ploy by JohnKey
Mouahaha - it's all going according to my plan...
-
After the election, he kept his word, and Labour had an option: Greens or UF? Labour chose UF; hardly "forced".
Quite right, Graeme. Although you have taken "forced" as a lawyer might, rather than its lighter use, such as "a forced smile".
It was Labour's turncoat style that upset me after they had given the impression that Greens were with them. Bending to one and rejecting six disenfranchised all those Green voters who voted thinking that numbers mattered.
There seems less of a pong to the Maori Party behaviour than there has been in the past from some of the minority parties.
-
Bart @ 1.32pm:
No apologies necessary, and thanks for the clarification.
Caleb D'Anvers @ 1.38:
I think that's an ever so slightly simplistic reading, but I do agree with your conclusion. And I think it's one the MSM has swallowed for far too long. The Labour-Ratana alliance is being taken for granted, and if the Ratana I know are typical, I don't think its going to be too long before there's a generational change and they want to disengage from politics altogether. Which wouldn't be a bad thing, in my view.
I'm not sure if this is a good play by Goff. [...]
A hint of colonial paternalism even?You betcha, and absolutely positively dumb strategy. He might actually want the Maori Party's support on legislation one of these days, and one might think there's previous form to show patting Tariana on the head and talking to her like a child with very special needs does not have a happy ending.
-
After the election, he kept his word, and Labour had an option: Greens or UF? Labour chose UF; hardly "forced".
Graeme didn't NZF make up the6 needed and if so, wouldn't it have been easier to have the Green vote when it worked for both sides rather than the constant opposition of UF and NZF thus cancelling out all support ? By guaranteeing UF and NZF you get your votes and occasionally 6 more with Greens. By going with Greens you get UF and NZF always voting against which is not the way to win arguments and influence people
-
It seems to me that Labour has no alternative government arrangement to offer Maori.
Therefore if Maori refuse to be involved the any governing arrangement they lose any true input, and force ACT to be come the only ally has for National.
If National is truly home to any centrist MPs, or if it wants to look at the result and acknowledge they got there by not changing too much really, they have a chance to prove it.
What can they get and what influence can they have? We will have to wait and see. But, potentially the Maori party is in a position to have a significant role in government irrespective of the major party.
-
[Goff] might actually want the Maori Party's support on legislation one of these days, and one might think there's previous form to show patting Tariana on the head and talking to her like a child with very special needs does not have a happy ending.
No one should be in the least surprised to see this:
Mrs Turia labelled Mr Goff's comments "bloody patronising behaviour" and said he was scaremongering to try to derail the agreement process.
"He's trying, once more, to frighten our people into saying we should sit with Labour," she said.
"Well, Labour didn't even invite us to sit with them in the last government and our people are sick and tired of being told what to do. He should stick with rebuilding the Labour Party instead of trying to dismantle others."
Support for a deal - which would make the National-led government more secure over the next three years - is reported to be strong in the nationwide hui the Maori Party is holding to gauge opinions of its draft agreement.
-
OMG - I agree with Tariana Turia!
Goff's Gaffe.
-
OMG - I agree with Tariana Turia!
I know... It's a most uncomfortable place to be, but these are the End of Days. :)
-
I'm finding it difficult to reconcile Goff's obvious intelligence with his little outburst. Even if it doesn't ring any alarm bells in his own head, surely he should be getting advice that would temper such folly?
No, that's right...Labour leaders neither seek nor accept advice. 'snot just the pope that's infallible hahahahaha
-
It seems to me that Labour has no alternative government arrangement to offer Maori.
Well they are not the Party trying to form a coalition are they?You don't need an arrangement to be on the opposition benches.Doh!
-
Well they are not the Party trying to form a coalition are they?You don't need an arrangement to be on the opposition benches.Doh!
No, but Goff's sure got a damn funny way of forming a constructive relationship with a party that (as I said) he might be courting himself, and sooner rather than later.
-
Graeme didn't NZF make up the6 needed and if so, wouldn't it have been easier to have the Green vote when it worked for both sides rather than the constant opposition of UF and NZF thus cancelling out all support ? By guaranteeing UF and NZF you get your votes and occasionally 6 more with Greens. By going with Greens you get UF and NZF always voting against which is not the way to win arguments and influence people
Absolutely. I mean, I understood the tactics behind the move, but I did feel really burned by Labour's patronising sidelining of the Greens during those coalition talks. It was probably their one chance to exert true influence in cabinent, but Clark realised that, in this case, the numbers counted.
Unfortunately, it's meant this time around the Greens won't have any say either. It's one of the shames of NZ politics that neither Donald nor Fitzimmons ever got the opportunity to show off their stuff with one of the Environment portfolios.
The current deal Key's done with the Maori Party? Tactically very canny, and I'd like to see how it works because it will mean that Labour will have to rethink how to deal with the MP (and Goff really should've kept schtum- that was an incredibly stupid thing to say in the context), but also, as Gordon Campbell points out in a recent Scoop column, how they're going to align themselves with the Left in the future. Also, how is National going to satisfy both sides of their coalition? There isn't a lot that ACT and the MP have in common.
Interesting times allround, although someone should remind Key that he's just created a "four-headed Monster."
Post your response…
This topic is closed.