Posts by Henry Barnard
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Jonesing, in reply to Keir Leslie,
It’s also hard to reconcile the unity talk with the “let’s fuck the ABCers” stuff, and that definitely worries me. My enthusiasm for a bloodbath is very low.
So is mine. As for the ABCers, whoever they are, they are, as always, just fucking themselves. Like Deborah, I will get behind whoever is elected leader... and I will try and do my best to, not so much forget as put to one side what I have witnessed during this process.
I have already had my wine :)
-
Hard News: Jonesing, in reply to BenWilson,
Whoever is feeding him his gossip, and I do think there’s someone, is really fucking with their party.
+1
Who is in a position to quash this? Cunliffe has already dealt with one form of dog whistle politics. This, the `Don't-vote-for-Cunliffe-because-he-is-divisive' (partly reflected in Keir's reference to `form') is coming from somewhere.
-
Hard News: Jonesing, in reply to Stephen Judd,
Gower is not well liked in Labour generally, on any side, I would have said.
True. As I said, the MP who really likes him is Collins - a mutual feeling, I wouldn't be surprised.
-
Hard News: Jonesing, in reply to Keir Leslie,
Cunliffe gets asked about loyalty heaps because historically he’s had form in that area.
Really? It is ironic that the time that Cunliffe was supposedly `outed' on loyalty - last years conference - it was another Paddy Gower generated storm. We have yet another now: Gower drawing on `news' he was significantly responsible for manufacturing at the time.
-
Hard News: Jonesing, in reply to Alex Coleman,
There is at least 1 caucus member who wanted Paddy to report that Cunliffe will have a caucus in which 15 members hate his guts, but lacks the courage to be open about it, or accept the party process.
Only 1? I went along to a husting and, like many, have been following the others in other ways. At the one I attended Robertson portrayed himself as the one who could `unify' the party. Cunliffe, as always, was made to answer the obligatory question about `loyalty'... and, in other venues, constantly asked why so many people disliked him with Robertson looking virtuous, sitting by his side.
Well, if Robertson cannot bring any discipline to his supporters at this stage, what hope for the future? And why remain deafeningly silent on this kind of dog whistling? I won't say it as bad as other types of dog whistling but it is certainly corrosive.
My take on Gower is that the politican he most admires is `Crusher' Collins.
-
This, from Duncan Garner, is sad:
Robertson’s people won’t give up; they seriously dislike Cunliffe, they really do.They really really do.
I have spoken to a number of Labour MPs in recent days who openly despise Cunliffe. The hatred and bile towards him has not subsided. It actually seems to have got stronger and louder in the final stretch of this race. One senior MP in the Robertson camp described him to me over the weekend as "an insincere prat" who is "a fake that would be shown up bloody quickly". Others have described him in similar terms
I do hope there is a significant degree of hyperbole in all this. Clearly, Robertson hasn't got much of a grip on his supporters in caucus. And it would be useful to know the MPs who "openly" despise Cunliffe: if it is open then Garner can name them, surely?
-
Hard News: Jonesing, in reply to nzlemming,
Haven’t you ever taken a job and woken up one morning to say “This crap is not what I signed on for!”?
Yes, I have. And I realised I wasn't any good at it nor was I doing anybody any good by trying.... but it didn't take me two years, nor did I try and keep somebody who could do the job out of it.
-
Hard News: Jonesing, in reply to nzlemming,
Perhaps...but that was not my impression based on the tone of some of his remarks.
I still don't understand why he put himself forward for the leadership in 2011 given what he said in yesterdays interview. Surely even two years would have been enough for him to witness the bear pit at first hand and to work out whether he was prepared to do the kind of work required in it.
-
Hard News: Jonesing, in reply to Raymond A Francis,
Not sure about this. The person who undermined Shearer was Shearer himself.
I found the Q&A interview with him yesterday very revealing. I don't have a transcript but I picked up on this:
The thing I found most difficult was the pettiness of politics and being in opposition. A lot of it was petty, a lot of it was venal... What you get caught up with, particularly as leader, is point scoring and that kind of pettiness...and [leans forward] I just found it boring, I found it beneath me and I wasn't very good at it because of that. A lot of other people thrive on it, they love it. I mean that's the thing they love about it, the arena of politics. For me, [sneers] I found it a bit below me.
And there's more.
What did he expect? That somehow he could parachute into the Prime Ministership just as he had parachuted into the leadership? That he didn't need to do the hard yards? People like Mallard know what its like to be in opposition for nearly a decade. Why take up the leadership of a party if you aren't going to put in the work? And why sneer at people who have the skills to get the work done? Does Shearer really believe that those who do the work in the `arena' don't also want to be able to make a change to New Zealand just as much as he does?
He seems to want a senior role but he wants others to do the work to get him one.
-
Hard News: Jonesing, in reply to Carol Stewart,
I thought that they all did pretty well. However, I take the point: pushing oneself forward as the candidate of `unity' would seem to imply that, if either of the other two are selected, then the caucus would be disunited. I am sure that this was not intended but it does almost become an inevitable unintended consequence of the message that `unity' resides in one person. Cunliffe, in particular, pushed the message that, whoever got elected Leader, the caucus need to be united and to get behind that person.