Sunday, November 25, 2012

Matt gets it wrong

Matt McCarten is totally off the mark with his Herald on Sunday piece this morning. He opines:

Any doubt about who will lead the Labour Party at the next election is over. The Labour Party conference was a huge success for two reasons.
Firstly, the rank-and-file delegates democratised the party; secondly, new leader David Shearer dispatched his rival and any other potential pretenders to his seat.
The rank and file voted to have a huge say in electing their parliamentary leader. The caucus will still determine if there is a leadership ballot, but every aspirant knows from now on they need to be respectful to the people who raise the money and knock on doors if they ever want to lead the party.

Where do we start. Ought we ignore the fact that Labour's rank and file strongly supports David Cunliffe? Should we point out to Matt that David Shearer's leadership is only safe until February?

But wait; there's more:

While the media attention was focused on what level the caucus threshold would be to trigger a vote, the coverage underplayed the importance of other structural and constitutional changes.
The party has modernised and simplified itself from top to bottom. The organisational structures have transformed the party from a monolithic, multi-layered bureaucracy to a flat-level, flexible campaign machine.

If Matt McCarten thinks that imposing a quota for female members of Labour Electorate Committees is what you do when you have "modernised", we have a bridge to sell him. As we said at the beginning of the week, girls can do anything. Labour's quota system which allows women to comprise 100% of LEC's but prohibits men comprising more than 50% is not only discriminatory to men, but it patronises women, and it is archaic.

There's nothing modern at all about what Labour did last week. Our biggest surprise is that Matt McCarten doesn't seem to be able to see that.


Gollum's finger said...

Shearer has hit his straps and is going from strength to strength.
Key's buggered now, not only from his own stupid behaviour, but because Shearer's popularity is on the rise. He timed that very well. The Right has very much underestimated Mr Shearer, our next Prime minister.

Ginge said...

So in 2014 my party vote will go to the Greens because their caucus deserves the support in the way that the Labour party caucus currently does not.

Why? Well I have always valued competence over idealogical considerations. So I look at what people do rather than what they say and make judgements accordingly. It is the reason that I find National so distasteful as they routinely bring misery to so many whilst saying that the experience will be good for them. A hypocritical cover as they transfer wealth from the children of the poor and the future to their backpockets now.

The Greens have been getting steadily more politically competent over the last decade. They are now at to the point that I’m willing to trust them not to screw up too much with my vote. And they run their operations in a way that would make any management graduate like myself beam with pleasure. Their operational net systems are a bit primitive, but so are Labours

From my viewpoint outside, the Green caucus appears to be be made up of competent people who actually work together for a common objective – something that is notably lacking in the current Labour caucus. While they are obviously short of ministerial experience, they are clearly in a position that they have several people ready for it. And they don’t appear to waste their effort and time with idiotic scrabbling for position when ‘victory’ is meaningless without the treasury benches. They do not spend the money from parliamentary services on a relatively few over-paid staffers in their isolated hierarchical offices