How does Andrew Little win Labour Leadership and unify the caucus?

20
4

Andrew-Little

Audrey Young’s excellent column on how the Caucus vote  is shaping up shows how Andrew Little becomes the next leader of the Labour Party.

She identifies the factions as the following…

Andrew Little 6: Andrew Little, David Cunliffe, Iain Lees Galloway, Sue Moroney, Carmel Sepuloni, Poto Williams

Nanaia Mahuta 6: Nanaia Mahuta, Peeni Henare, Adrian Rurawhe, Su’a William Sio, Louisa Wall, Meka Whaitiri

David Parker 9: David Parker, Clayton Cosgrove, Kelvin Davis, Stuart Nash, Damien O’Connor, Jenny Salesa, David Shearer, Rino Tirakatene, Phil Twyford

Grant Robertson 11: Grant Robertson, Jacinda Ardern, David Clark, Clare Curran, Ruth Dyson, Kris Faafoi, Phil Goff, Chris Hipkins, Annette King, Trevor Mallard, Megan Woods

The way the rules work is that no one who can get over 50% in the first round goes to a second round with the lowest candidates second preferences coming into play. If Nanaia can lead the Maori Caucus and confirm their second preferences and if those preferences go to Little, then he wins the Caucus vote alongside the Union vote and if he picks up the membership vote who are still furious at the way Cunliffe was treated, then he wins.

But that’s half the issue, the other half will be what he does with a Caucus as damaged and warped as the one Shearer allowed to display with his bizarre public attacks 2 weeks ago.

The main failing of Labour during the election was the disunity. No one is going to vote for a team as divided as Labour has become, it’s not an issue of argument – NZers overwhelmingly voted for Key despite Dirty Politics and mass surveillance lies – it’s an issue of basic competency.

In this, Little desperately needs the symbolism of unity. A co-deputy situation would allow Little to reach across the factions and generate that symbolism. If Little gave Nanaia and Stuart Nash co-deputy roles, he would ensure his own factional majority while reaching out to the right of the Party and promoting one of their rising stars in Nash.  Handing Nash economic development would allow Nash and Little to embark upon a tour of the regions to start the reconnection process.

This co-Deputy solution would look like power sharing and that Labour have listened to the complaints they didn’t connect with middle NZ while not alienating their members.

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

It is this need to create unity that makes Grant’s decision to select Jacinda as his own deputy such a risky move. Jacinda is in the same faction as Grant, by promoting one of his own rather than reach out to the other factions of Labour , Grant simply seeds the ground for the same resentments that plagued Labour over the last 7 years.

Parker being backed to the hilt by the ABCs means he is unlikely to win much of the activist membership support who see that faction as the main problem, but he could still be brought on board as Finance so that Little’s front bench has the best talent rather than time servers.

Cunliffe as whip would be funny.

 

20 COMMENTS

  1. Cunliffe deserves better than Whip. He should get Finance. He is far more able than the Scrooge like Parker. And it would be a huge FU to the ABC’s. Long overdue. Nash in economic development is not what the north of the country needs either.

  2. Wait why do you want Little as leader? He might bring unification to the party, but at what cost? What’s the point of a unified Labour if it’s just a centrist party. That might make it a great alternative to Winston, but it will be no friend of the left.

    • Labour, as a main-stream party will always be centrist, as it should be.
      If you want a centrist, social-democratic party to become more radical in its policies, then you will have to actually win the argument and consequently win over not only the Right of Labour, but at least some of the soft-Left of the Nats, or your radical reforms will be cut off at the knees before you can say “one-term government”.

      • Many seem to be stuck in the mind-set that only a Labour or National leader could ever be Prime Minister. They forget the lessons of how the Labour party rose to power in the first place.

        Progressive ideas very seldom come from old people, old institutions or old parties. Labour is now definitively an old party with no society-improving ideas.

        It is destined to eventually merge with National like the United and Reform parties did when faced the new threat of Labour many years ago and similar to what is happening with the coalition of Red and Blue parties in Germany today.

        Right or centrist parties don’t win elections, the left just fails to win them. Labour isn’t a left-wing party any more and history shows it never will be again.

        • @korakys. I agree. People are still behaving as though this is a two party system. Under MMP it is not so it is possible for small parties to come from nowhere. If Labour hadn’t sabotaged Internet/Mana that party could have gone on to be what the left needed.
          History shows that all parties eventually die. Labour has passed its use by date. Although it may sound unlikely, National will be outdated within a decade. Considering all the challenges that confront this Earth, we have voted for the very worst possible Government, that has no vision of the future at all. Very soon that will be obvious to even the thickest voter. At that point National is history. In the mean time start supporting anyone but the big two.

        • I’ve done a bit more thinking and the right can win elections despite the best efforts of the left when they use fear tactics.

          Additionally incumbents almost always win in conditions of solidarity inducement such as during wars and following disasters.

  3. Well after going to the Palmerston North Husting with no firm opinion but slightly leaning towards Little, I found him uninspiring. I do not doubt his credentials to galvanise and rebuild, however. In terms of the kaupapa presented, Parker alone stood out. While everyone spoke of opportunity and aspiration, he was the only one who spoke about equality of opportunity AND more equitable outcomes and reiterated it later when he spoke about a more egalitarian society – noone else couched their speeches in this language. The other thing he emphasised was unity of purpose. His parsimonious fiscal approach to date, not withstanding, he now has the edge for me.

    • I don’t disagree Ian . Little has had a charisma bypass just like Parker. Parker is extremely able and most competent. He lacks Cunliffe’s compassion and broad long term vision. Labour are at a crossroads . There are two parties vying for control of one entity.Unfortunately it looks like a strong/tough individual like Little may win. One plus is that his lack of humour will be a good foil for Key’s shallow pseudo ordinary guy act.

  4. so pleased I already voted.
    this is not a Leadership Election, it is a Leadership Debacle.

    I can’t for the live of me warm up to any of the blokes. Maybe it is just that all my life apart from the Clark years have been dominated by blokes that just look like these geezers. White with a prominent tinge of grey, grey suits, grey glasses, grey ideas about equality and the likes (however white grey man being the most equal of them all) and literally no new ideas, only platitudes.

    Unfortunately I could not leave point 2 – 4 empty. So I guess I will end up with another grey white uninspiring bloke on the help of the ship going straight towards the iceberg.

  5. To prefer one set of policies to another, as expressed by the leadership candidates, misses the point. Once the election is over, they will all have to sing off the same song-sheet. a little acurately-placed outrage is appropriate, but beyond this, all candidates will have to share the podium and develop a calm, assured persona that will pursuade the national electorate that as a group, not just as one charismatic Fuhrer, will be able to rule with a steady hand, and with the best advantage of the nation at heart.
    There is no room in this for utu or one agenda over another. It will be more appropriate to bring out those factional ideas when we approach a third term in office.

  6. Andrew Little is dour but maybe that’s what is needed at this point in time, to calm things down a bit. He’s definitely a person with integrity and he seems fairly consistent.

  7. I just don’t get why you like Nash so much. He only won because McVicar split the right wing vote. He’s mates with Hooton, Slater, Lusk etc. He is certainly very confident of his own abilities but I do not understand why you rate him at all Martyn.

    • The Labour Party is in disarray. Total and utterer disarray. The only hope for the future is unity and the sense that Labour have listened to muddle nz – the boiled meat and 3 vege politics Nash and Little can serve up could work to bring muddle NZ back to Labour.

      • I agree with everything you say except for Nash. He would create even more divisions. Little and Mahuta would make a good team, and if there was any need for a second deputy I’d go for Twyford.

      • Martyn
        Your disdain will win few converts.
        The disarray you speak of is perpetuated when brandished by your style of attack blogging.
        Meditation on the “Muddle New Zild” you so despise, could be a good opportunity for a little empathy-training for you. This is a skill you will need if you want to advance the cause. Trouble is, if you so loath “Muddle NZD,” why would you even want to help them?
        Although it is true that there has been a worrying back-sliding in conditions and structures in the West over recent times, it has happened within the context of a mythology of progress which so many people desperately want to believe.
        It will take considerable subtlety to illustrate a new paradigm which does not excite anger or despair.
        This isn’t muddled or reprehensible. It is purely human.
        The question is: what change is this much-to-be-desired radical agenda to advance?
        The reality is that experience shows that a simplistic belief in a workers paradise was slightly misguided in the thirties and almost totally irrelevant today.
        That is not to say that collectivism doesn’t have many areas where it can usefully contribute. Or that disadvantage of opportunity and outcome must be strongly resisted. Just that the solutions are never quite as simple as we might dream.
        The vision of the Left, and I mean anyone on the Left, is not that we have all answers to those fundamental challenges of an unequal society, it is that we understand that it is our responsibility to try to find solutions.
        We also have to model in our private demeanour, the respect for both friend and maybe also enemy which inevitably will be a part of any meaningful solution.

  8. I’m afraid middle NZ, without an alternative, widespread media voice for the Left, will never again vote for Labour. Labour is finished. Just look at the contestants in the leadership vote. Is any of them somebody you could see becoming PM in a landslide?

    I can’t.

    They need to stop with the infighting and identity politics. Gay people, all very nice and good, but most of middle NZ is homophobic, xenophobic, conservative white people. They will not listen to a word you say if you are seen championing gays, womans rights and Maori beneficiaries. I have no doubt in my mind these are important, but there are MORE PRESSING ISSUES, like the TPPA, global warming, the slow demise of the US economy, our growing environmental damage, the rise of China, our economic isolation and soveriegnty, our badly-cut and punishing welfare system, and possibly most important for middle NZ, JOBS. There are bugger all jobs, and as helpful as making things better for minorities would be, it will NOT win us an election. Just look at how JK said ‘no asset sales’, won, then proceeded to sell as much as possible of State Housing. We too need to win before we can implement policy.

    We need a Left, protectionist, liberal, social-democratic government for the people in AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, or there will be no going back. I’m truly afraid for the future of this beautiful country if we have another term or two of the Right.

  9. Yes Martyn you are so right here,
    Labour is broken and no voter is going to listen to them until they show a credible opposition with a convincing policy platform to offer against the grey backdrop of NatZ slash and burn.

    I share similar concerns as John Wesley Harding

    “We need a Left, protectionist, liberal, social-democratic government for the people in AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, or there will be no going back. I’m truly afraid for the future of this beautiful country if we have another term or two of the Right.”

    Enough division of the current lot who brought us to this sad place, we are very supportive of Stuart Nash as we in HB & Gisborne know him very well and he is very Loyal, so with Little, Nash and Mahuta, that combination would offer a very powerful clean message to Key & his mob that here are an unsoiled group who know how to connect with the provinces like the last lot didn’t.

    That will give Key some discomfort and destabilise him at this crucial time when Key wants to take a wrecking ball to our land and future, their input will be vital to save our future for sure.

  10. At first I hoped you were joking, but you continue to promote the “Nashy”. Have you not read footnote # 13 on page 156 of Dirty Politics?

  11. Audrey Young has it wrong on many scores, particularly Phil Goff: he will not support Robertson for the way he has manipulated, rolled and now broken Shearer.

    Nash? Is a senior roll? Have you checked with Simon Lusk on that?
    Many members want the fool expelled.

Comments are closed.