WRITING ABOUT the Labour Party these days puts me in mind of the joke about the American tourist and the Irish farmer.
Seems there was this American tourist driving down a narrow lane in the heart of Ireland. He needed to get back to Dublin in a hurry but even with the assistance of a detailed road-map was finally forced to admit that he was hopelessly lost. Just then, at the side of the lane, he saw an Irish farmer leaning over a wooden gate in the hedgerow. “Excuse me, Sir,” inquired the exasperated American, “but could you tell me how to get to Dublin?” “Is it lost you are, Sir,” inquired the farmer. “I’m afraid so”, the tourist replied. “And you’re wanting to get to Dublin?” The American nodded. “Ah, well,” said the farmer, taking off his cap and scratching his head, “if I was wanting to get to there, I’d never be starting from here.”
Has Labour ever been so hopelessly lost? Has the path to electoral victory ever been so obscured? Starting from where they are now, how can they possibly get to where they need to be on 20 September?
What is it? What is making it so hard for David Cunliffe and his party to get any sort of political traction?
The answer lies in Labour’s caucus. Not only is a majority of the caucus profoundly unhappy with Cunliffe as their leader, it is also profoundly at odds with the Labour Party members who elected him. Labour’s MPs are torn between their desire to occupy the Treasury benches – and thus be free of the Party’s influence – and the realisation that even becoming the government would only postpone the confrontation with the party that Cunliffe’s election made inevitable.
Expressing the problem with maximum brutality: most of Labour’s present crop of MPs are not fit for purpose. A handful are holdovers from the Rogernomics Era – and thus reminders of the very worst period in Labour’s history. More are the products of Helen Clark’s personal intervention in the candidate selection process; followers of a career-path that began in the student unions (or MFAT) and ended on the Prime Minister’s floor of the Beehive. The remainder are what emerges from the deeply compromised horse-trading that assembles Labour’s Party List – burnt out trade unionists and identity politicians.
Cunliffe himself is a product of Clark’s shoulder-tapping (albeit via her confidants Jonathan Hunt, Judith Tizard and Chris Carter). What made him Party Leader, however, was his comprehension that Labour, both ideologically and organisationally, had to be made fit for purpose as a credible twenty-first century contender for political power. What made him a bad Party Leader was his failure to grasp that to become a credible contender Labour not only needed to become much more representative of New Zealand at large, but also that this would necessitate a wholesale clean-out of its caucus.
The sort of government Cunliffe wanted to lead simply could not be constructed from the human material in Labour’s caucus. Rather than confront this reality, however, Cunliffe defaulted to his deep personal impulse and religious belief that all people and all points of view are ultimately reconcilable in the spirit of compromise and goodwill. Psychologically, he simply could not accept that at least half of his caucus colleagues would happily dance on his grave. In his fruitless quest for a working caucus consensus, Cunliffe has steadily surrendered the mandate for change given to him by the rank-and-file members and trade union affiliates.
The public’s perception of Cunliffe’s willingness to compromise is one of profound weakness. This has not been helped by his habit of attempting to ingratiate himself with individuals and groups he perceives as actually or potentially hostile.
There is, of course, a paradox here. The very qualities that make Cunliffe a poor Leader of the Opposition would also make him an excellent Prime Minister of the complicated MMP coalition government he would be called upon to lead. Had Cunliffe been surrounded by a caucus who believed in him and understood the paradoxical qualities of his leadership-style, they could have provided him a measure of protection – in much the same way that Roger Douglas, Richard Prebble, Michael Basset and Mike Moore ran interference for David Lange. Instead, he has been surrounded by caucus colleagues willing him to fall at every hurdle (and only too happy to make sure that he did).
To arrive at the electoral finish-line first from such a parlous position, Cunliffe will need more than a road-map. He’ll need a miracle.
And yet in another article you were hailing Cunliffe brave for his comments not silly. Sigh. Chris Trotter putting in the boot as usual, just part of the get Cunliffe as any cost brigade. This may very well backfire on you lot.
Yes, while the Labour Party may or may not be hopelessly lost within its self, what is a lot worse and a lot more damaging to the N.Zers that Chris alludes to be caring about, is that National are hopelessly lost at running the country!
Three more years of this lot will be a hell of lot worse than a ‘left’ coalition with a few slightly disgruntled Labour MPs.
If National do get back in again , the ‘glossed over’ major problems that are simmering beneath the surface, will be come so irreversibly entrenched that N.Z will head down a track that doesn’t even bare thinking about!
Miracles do happen.
I just can’t understand why their policies seem to miss out the average hard working guys. Lets see bold policy, and less of the national lite.
It’s got nothing to do with leadership or lack of leadership, Chris.
Labour have repeatedly demonstrated they are inept and not to be trusted. My parents voted Labour at every election , but you’ll never get me to vote for the bunch of clowns and saboteurs that constitute Labour these days. Indeed, all parties are presenting clowns and saboteurs as candidates, so I see no reason to vote at all….. might as well let National get back in and bring the country to its knees ultra-quickly.
NZ was put on the path to collapse by the phony Labour government of the mid-80s, and it’s far to late to correct anything at this late stage in the game.
So you dont feel that national should be punished for their past and present sins? but that labour should be forever punished for sins of over 30 years ago.
You cannot change the past, but its never too late to try and make the future better by addressing the problems of today.
You can give up, but it doesn’t mean everyone else will.
Anyone who thinks that national should get a third term is a traitor in my book Afewknowthetruth.
Noam Chomsky when detailing the demise of independent radical newspapers in post-war Britain due progressive strangulation by lack of advertising support, noted:
“A mass movement without any major media support, and subject to a great deal of active press hostility, suffers a serious disability, and struggles against grave odds.”
That is in my opinion the reason DC, and the Left in general struggle in this country.
Chomsky also details the 5 filters news items have to go through to be published:
“(1) the size, concentrated ownership, owner wealth, and profit orientation of the dominant mass-media firms;
(2) advertising as the primary income source of the mass media;
(3) the reliance of the media on information provided by government, business, and “experts” funded and approved by these primary sources and agents of power;
(4) “flak” as a means of disciplining the media;
(5) “anticommunism” (or whatever the so-called current manifestation is designated to be, e.g. ” anything but the loony left, or ABC) as a national religion and control mechanism.”
With that arrayed against him, is it no wonder David Cunliffe has one hell of a battle ahead, it’s not so much for the hearts and minds of the people, but against the forces of the corporate interest.
Well said Dialey.
Cunliffe has the strengths and weaknesses of Nelsonian leadership. He’s trustworthy and not lacking in courage – but playing dirty isn’t part of his game. Historically such leaders succeed when their loyalists quietly prevent the crooks from tripping them up.
There is a forest of deadwood in Labour, and whether it gets chipped into medium density fibre board, recycled by organically cultured huhu grubs, or clear felled by the lineal descendants of Hone Heke it has to go.
“The answer lies in Labour’s caucus. Not only is a majority of the caucus profoundly unhappy with Cunliffe as their leader, it is also profoundly at odds with the Labour Party members who elected him.”
What a damning assessment, but the more I hear and see, the more I agree with it.
It tells us more, not just about ABCers in Labour’s caucus, this society is so damned divided, it will NEVER return to a true social contract, unless some disaster strikes. I realise this every time I walk the streets of Auckland City, like today, where so much diversity, but also division, is present, and where everyone is part of a larger agenda, where it is a solid capitalist system now, forcing everyone to tow the systemic lines, to only strive for personal security and some career and other achievements, and where caring for the greater cause is totally ALIEN.
This society is DEAD, in my view, it is no longer what NZ used to be, and it is LOST forever, unless people dare to reclaim their country and society, but this will never happen, as most are totally committed into their personal savings and building schemes, their opportunities, their advantages, their personal aspirations, society is a fabric of loose nothingness, of consumerist madness and materialist replacement behaviour, where eating, drinking and having sex replaces personal fulfilment and relationships.
New Zealand as a society is dying, gradually, and what we observe in politics is just part of the observation. The MSM are the worst part of it, having power hungry, attention seeking players go over dead bodies to build up attentions and ratings, and that is what this country has deteriorated to, same as many others.
What a sad day, when I think of it.
I think you are wrong that labour’s caucus is “profoundly unhappy” with David Cunliffe, I don’t think they are at all. I think you just got sucked in the national/media spin machine because thats what you want to believe, but it doesn’t mean that it true.
WORD – I was merely quoting what Chris Trotter wrote further above, and stating, that the more I hear and see, the more I agree with what Chris wrote.
A truly unified caucus, and that is what we are talking about, would look very different to what we have, as their support of the leader is more lip-service, nothing else.
Of course Cunliffe has some core supporters in caucus, and they tend to stick to the gun. But recent weeks have shown, there are a fair few having their own agendas, whether David Cunliffe likes them or not.
Of course you would. Do you think national has “A truly unified caucus” ? Perception is everything right? maintained by a complicit msm, even if its a lie. Youre being sucked in because you want to be, it suits your bias.
Another Chris article to leave you hopelessly lost. Can someone show me the way out of this convoluted blog piece.
What is wrong?
Simple. There is no room for an honest politician, not with such a toxic media. If Cunliffe has done anything wrong, it is naively expecting people to take him at face value, to share his passion, respect his honesty, his earnestness and determination. No, politics has become the cynics game, with the media acting like useless referees. A population left jaded from money or lack of. Since everyone is giving Cunliffe advice, I have some of my own: Never take advice from your enemy. The only winners in this election will be the media. A real leader cannot be summed up by a sound bite. Are we going to let our future be decided by the few (media elite) or the people (you).
Better the devil you know, this is what the National party want you to believe. Don’t relinquish your chance at freedom because of the fear of change. Better to chance freedom than resign oneself to the familiarity of captivity.
Totally agree D-Man.
Totally agree D-Man, its time to vote positive, and kick John key out.
Chris, come the big day, who are you going to vote for? Me? I’m voting for Labour. David Cunliffe will make a great PM. And the alternative, more Hekia, more Joyce, more Collins,more “I know nothing” Key.
Whatever you say about Labour, three more years of that brains trust is the real horror story.
Charlieboy, you took the words right out of my mouth!
Spot on Charlieboy !! Well said !!
So Chris, hypothetically ,if you were to be employed as a strategist for the Labour Party ,what key changes would you make to policy and personal?
Where would you take the party and how would you go about it?
That is indeed the challenge, and I think Chris has articulated the problem very well. Some contributors here are misreading what he says as “putting the boot” into David Cunliffe… he isn’t at all, he is just detailing what Cunliffe is up against in the caucus. Some loyal supporters don’t want to see the divisions that are there, but they are there for sure. I want to see a strong, united Labour party, but I also want to see one that represents the people that they purport to represent, and one that offers a genuine alternative to National.
While the battle rages within Labour that won’t happen. So they don’t deserve my vote.
Kingi. Chris has articulated the problem well, but instead of him going on the radio ,tv and print and saying the same thing over and over ,I want him to now go to the next step and tell us exactly what he would do about it!
I’m not talking wishy washy broad brush strokes ,but proper indepth detail.
Criticising the easy bit .Offering proper feasible solutions takes a bit more effort!
I am a history buff and I genuinely admire a lot of your historical works on New Zealand from a left-wing perspective, Chris. However it saddens me that you appear to be buying into Tory propaganda that David Cunliffe is a dead loss. I cannot accept that description for a person that continues to give us policy alternatives and offer solutions for the wide range of social problems that exist in New Zealand. This is in direct contrast to our present PM who maintains that everything is terrific in the land of milk and honey and any perceived problems are simply an invention of the left. They are not inventions, they are real and they are affecting our people. People with conscience and integrity will recognize David Cunliffe at least has the courage of his convictions, even if makes him vulnerable to abuse. Others will go and do what they have always done – vote National.
I am going to put two links to pieces in The Standard that I think are relevant to this post.
Here is the first of them, along with a quote: http://thestandard.org.nz/growing-inequality-can-be-seen-as-clever-politics/
“The electoral message is clear but unwelcome. A government that puts the interests of the well-off first can relax. As a significant proportion of the population becomes increasingly voiceless and invisible – in other words, devoid of hope – their absence from the polling booths on election day means they can safely be ignored.”
And the second, also with a quote: http://thestandard.org.nz/something-amazing-has-happened-to-the-labour-party/
“Angela Eagle, the party chair who steered the forum, says that everyone knows “without fiscal credibility we’ll be smashed. We can’t protect the people we care about by raging from the sidelines.”
What Angela Eagle didn’t say is that fiscal responsibility increasingly means NOT protecting the people she claims to care about.
It is no wonder there is tension within the Labour Party: they are used to being part of an establishment that is now intensely hostile to the thought of even a very modestly effective Labour Party. It was odd, in 2011, to hear Matthew Hooton offering suggestions as to who should lead Labour. Now the ratchet has tightened enough for his screaming for Labour to replace its leader to seem ordinary and predictable. And lying behind Matthew’s shrieks that we do hear there are no doubt all sorts of threats and promises that we do not hear.
There is a deep determination abroad that the voiceless remain so, leaving the upper middle class in peace, to get on with their overseas family holidays and cosmetic dentistry. Under these circumstances we should not be surprised that many of the Labour caucus, like their English counterparts, currently prefer prudence over valour. The problem is, each time Labour rearranges itself to accommodate the tightening ratchet, tyranny wins a trick and social democracy loses one. For these reasons, the best thing that could happen to NZ is for the left to win against the odds, with David Cunliffe as Labour’s leader, even if that does include certain caucus members intent on dragging their heels.
“the best thing that could happen to NZ is for the left to win against the odds, with David Cunliffe as Labour’s leader, even if that does include certain caucus members intent on dragging their heels.”
Agree. And if the Greens, and IMP get sufficient numbers, they will be able to exert a real influence and drag Labour, despite the kicking, screaming and backstabbing from aforementioned members, back towards its ideological roots.
Yep it’s time to stop picking through the entrails and it is time to nail your colours to the mast. Everyone, including commentators, must declare their intentions and take ownership of the consequences of publishing their influential opinions.
I am going to encourage everyone to vote Labour. Why? Because the alternative, which people must think deeply about,is dire. The Natz have been allowed to not declare their hand,and this lack of transparency is far more frightening than any spectres the dirty tricks brigade can drum up about Cunliffe.
Most brilliantly put- everyone knows National caucus is hiding something but can’t put a finger on just what, except you can feel in your bones it’s bad (for humans). Jonkey’s refusal to sack Collins must surely mean something along the lines of a plot more dastardly then bears imagining which she would have disclosed if he had shown her the door.
Exactly what are the nats planning for after sept 20.
They have not said a word.
You can bet it will not be good for the middle class or the low paid or beneficeries.
I think the message is clear, that the liberal elites within labour don’t give a rats ass about working people. So as left wing activist, it’s your job to make them give a shit, or remove them.
Does Cunliffe care or respect working people, I’d say on reflection, yes. Does the likes of Shearer, Goff, and King? No, no they don’t. They think we are weak and they don’t fear us, they feel secure they will keep their seats. They should not.
The left needs to do what it has always done best, get rid of the scum that rises to the top of the pot. Lets work together to take one of them out – remove a problem for the labour leadership, cauterise the wound, put the fear of god back into labour MP’s who shit on the working class.
Personally, I say “Get Phil Goff” lets give the Tory scum one seat, and win an election.
Comments are closed.