Headline: Green Party decision on David Hay’s application to be a candidate in 2014 election
Russel Norman is doing an outstanding job as our Co-leader. The Green Party executive is extremely happy with his performance and we fully support his leadership.
The Green Party National Executive has accepted a two month old recommendation that David Hay not enter the party’s candidate pool for the 2014 general election.
The Party can now confirm that significant concerns about David Hay’s suitability as a candidate pre-date his announcement this week that he plans to stand for Co-leader of the party.
The party’s candidate selection committee recommended in early October that David Hay’s application to be a Green Party candidate be declined. That recommendation was based on interviews with David in August and September. The National Executive has upheld that recommendation today.
“The Green Party is committed to standing the best candidates we can for the 2014 general election. David Hay won’t be one of them,” said Green Party Co-convenor Georgina Morrison.
“Every political party has the right to determine the best candidates to put forward to voters. Today’s decision is really as simple as ensuring the Green Party is putting forward great candidates.
“Concerns about David’s effectiveness as a candidate were raised after the 2008 election and both during and after the 2011 election.
“We feel we have given David many chances to prove himself as someone committed to growing our party vote, and we believe he has been given a fair and proper hearing.
“The Green Party is focused on offering voters great policies to build a smart, clean and fair New Zealand, and we are committed to standing the best candidates to advance those ideas.
“I can understand that David will be unhappy with this decision, but the party reserves the right to stand the best candidates possible to grow the Green Party vote.
“Russel Norman is doing an outstanding job as our Co-leader. The Green Party executive is extremely happy with his performance and we fully support his leadership,” said Georgina Morrison.
—
Good one NZ Greens. Maintaining what’s working well makes good sense and the joint leadership of Russel Norman and Metiria Turei is doing just that.
Now with that destabilizing little bone of contention out of the way, the Greens can concentrate on becoming a coalition partner next year, when they and Labour form the next government.
Fairfax journalist Neil Reid has published an extraordinary piece on David Hay’s challenge of the Green Party leadership.
The above headline and first paragraph, using words like “jilted” and tying his rejection as candidate to David Hay’s challenge for leadership implies, that David Hay is being motivated by thwarted personal ambition and nothing else.
However, reading further down Neil Reid’s article we find that there has been some differences between David Hay and the Green Party over “strategy”.
Could there be more to the Green Party leadership challenge than sour grapes from the thwarted personal ambition of a career politician as Neil Reid’s article implies?
Or, are there some real doctrinal and strategic differences at stake with implications for the future of the Green Party?
Some serious (but vague) accusations have been made by both sides.
I hope that the current Green Party leadership and their challenger can bring the alleged strategic differences between them, out into the open where the members and indeed the public can judge if the current Green Party leadership is not sticking “to the Green Party Kaupapa” as David Hay has alleged. Or that David is unable to follow the agreed strategy of the party as his detractors have alleged.
Specifically: I would like David Hay to identify exactly what are the “Huge Challenges” he claims that the current leadership are “no longer the best match for”.
And from David Hay’s detractors I would like to hear what the “some issues”, that Green Party co-convener Georgina Morrison say they have with David Hay, really are?
And what exactly did David Hay say, or do wrong in the high profile Epsom electorate that seems to have got up the noses of the current leadership?
The Green Party say they were specifically concerned about Hay’s campaign in Epsom, that they had an agreed strategy and that David Hay was unable to follow it.
What exactly was, (and presumably still is) the “agreed strategy of the party” that David Hay is unable to follow, that makes the Green Party say that they “can not trust his word”?
This is a serious allegation of breach of trust.
The Green Party need to explain “The Agreed Strategy”.
And David Hay needs to explain why he can’t follow “The Agreed Strategy”.
Then, and only then, can we make a decision on the rights or wrongs of this dispute between David Hay and the current Green Party leadership.
Secrecy around these issues will not serve the membership or the public.
Press Release: David Hay
Time to forego the generalities. Megan Salole needs to come clean and detail the reasons why she thinks that David Hay should not be accepted into the candidate pool for the 2014 election.
Megan Salole needs to detail exactly what David Hay did or didn’t do in the Epsom campaign that led to David Hay being accused of not following “the agreed strategy of the party”?
What was that strategy? And how exactly did David Hay offend against it?
And on what grounds it is feared that David Hay “may do something publicly damaging to the party if given the platform as a candidate again?”
What is the political divide in this dispute?
The members and the public need to know before they can make any informed decision on who is right or wrong in this dispute.
Comments are closed.