The problem for the Greens has always been Labour. Labour hate anyone playing in their sandpit (the jeers and laughing at Labour HQ when Hone lost his seat will haunt me forever), so it’s always been Labour who have frustrated Green ambitions more than any other political party.
Labour will always hook up with NZ First to form a minority coalition and force the Greens to just accept it with a few paltry policy wins thrown in. I helped start MANA and championed the Internet-MANA alliance so as to give the progressive Left a means of using MMP to get to 51 without requiring the conservative brake peddle of NZ First. I didn’t count on having to fight Labour as well as National, ACT, the Conservatives, the Maori Party and NZ First as well.
With NZ First repositioning as the voice of the provinces, the Greens would have even less leverage with Labour who would sell them out in a second for Winston. With the appointment of a former pro-Capitalism, Coke-Cola consultant as Co-Leader of the Greens however, Labour face the sudden reality that they have to take them seriously.
Shaw’s first speech as leader was to ignore Labour altogether and immediately start reaching out to National on climate change. Getting National to be serious about climate change is like getting oil companies to get serious about solar power, but that doesn’t really matter – what matters is the perception that Shaw wants to work with National. The beauty of this strategy is that even if the left wing activist base walks (and the immediate reaction to Shaw as leader by members as Curwen describes it suggests that’s a reality), the Greens could drop to 6% but by being a potential ally of Key, Labour and NZ First would still have to offer the Greens more than Key can if Labour and NZ First want 2017.
I appreciate where Martyn is coming from here.
Labour is drifting and personally I think now with left/centrist co leader James Shaw, the further NZ Greens distances itself from that party the better. Labour is no longer the political advocate for workers and the underprivileged and hasn’t been for a long time and at this stage, I doubt it will swing back to its roots and core values, something which has been picked up by the Greens.
Another TDB article today by staunch NZ First supporter Curwen Rolinson, mentions a “#Black/Green 2017” suggestion, something which could work given Shaw’s left/centre position. It might work for Winston, having someone not so far left, for him to consider working with the new Green leadership lineup.
However, how that will go down with the rest of the Green MPs and membership is another story. Shaw will have to have the gift of the gab and work hard at it, if he’s to convince them it is a positive move for NZ Greens, to get it into government as an acceptable coalition partner.
I will be looking with interest at Shaw’s performance in Parliament today in his new role. This week we should get some small idea which direction he’s intending to take NZ Greens. Even more interesting will be how he goes up against Key and how he handles the nasty vindictive barbs fired at him, as the uncouth PM will do his best to denigrate and discredit Shaw and the Greens!
As Kevin Hague (my co leader choice) is taking time out to get over the past few months of campaigning and recharge and refocus himself, I’m picking Key will not pass the opportunity to spitefully mention to Shaw his leadership rival is sulking. Knowing Kevin, nothing could be further from the truth!
With all due respect Mary, your comments (like those of many other commentators on TDB) suggest that you don’t understand how the Greens work. The Greens co-leaders serve as the top spokespeople of the party, but what the party does is determined by consensus of the membership. The members serving as Greens co-leaders do not rule with an iron fist from the top down, unlike the leaders of most other political parties (including Mana and Internet), they can only argue their case as members (albeit highly respected members or they wouldn’t have been elected co-leaders).
I was skeptical of this myself, but I attended the AGM where Russell Norman was elected co-leader, and was very impressed by the facilitators, who were able to run a consensus-based meeting of a few hundred people, each acting as delegates for the consensus of their local branch. Other Opposition parties could learn a lot from the internal democracy of the Greens.
For example, imagine Labour restructuring itself as a fully democratic organisation. Imagine if the Internet Party actually adopted the policy decisions made by grassroots members in their Loomio group, as the NZ Pirates do, rather than over-ruling them from the top down. Imagine if Mana wasn’t the Hone Harawira party. Imagine thousands of kiwis participating in democratic decision-making all year round, rather than just once every three years. Imagine Aotearoa run by deep democracy. To quote Ali G, “let’s make it ‘appen”!
He was on Q&A yesterday and clearly indicated a coalition with National was hard to see, and that a pre-election coalition with Labour was the only way to oust the Govt in 2017.
On that point he is absolutely correct. Unless Labour + Greens present as a unified and credible Govt in waiting then there is NO chance for a change of Govt. All of my centrist buddies and co-workers see Key for what he is but a credible alternative wasn’t there at last election, and must be there 12-18months out from the next one.
The problem with centrist voters is that theyre informed politically by establishment media. There will never be a “credible” leftwing alternative good enough for the establishment, they want the neoliberal status quo and no dramatic variation from it and they will continue to run whaleoil-manufactured narratives that discredit labour leaders through trivial ad hominem attacks and dismiss any non-neoliberal policy as “looney-left” until they get the national-lite labour that they consider safehands. To the establishment media, and filtered through to their “centrist” audience, “infighting” within a political party is more dangerous than anything to a constituency and groupthink is the safest bet. The truth is that politics is a battle of ideas, and “infighting” represents that, natuonal’s brand of groupthink is the antithesis of progressive change. It is the status quo, so while it wont spook the middle it will never move everyone else off their feet to vote. These myths about the left’s performance in the last two elections are based completely on these same establishment narratives. It wasnt the infighting that killed labour, it was the media’s analysis of it and their constant projection that any disagreements among the caucus would somehow undermine their ability to form policy thus making them not fit to govern. Never mind the fact that they came to an election with a policy set of credible alternatives to nationals. So people voted national because the tv insinuated to them that nats dont fight amongst themselves. That’s the only excuse ive heard from centrist voters about why they voted national – because the left didnt have a “credible leader” and because they were turned off by the “infighting.” Funnily enough the two places the media constantly attack the left (its a rightwing tactic that has been utilised against the left in the UK and australia as well). It clearly washed off on the public without them realizing theyve been completely manipulated by the media’s inherent neo-liberal bias that supports the status quo.
Spot on Cliff!
You have read that pretty well in terms of ‘political strategy’ Martyn, the danger for the Green Party is that it is in fact ripped asunder by an impression that the Party would cosy up to National,(the closeness of the actual vote showing the lines of a possible schism that could develop),
James Shaw speaking this morning to RadioNZ National has taken great pains to distance Himself and the Party from any future coalition with National,(one would assume he having taken ‘advice’ from the rest of the Green Caucus),
Perhaps a future split in the Party is inevitable, while the upwardly mobile green colonizers of Wellington’s Aro Valley might welcome a Green Party of more Doctors, more Farmers, more Business-people there will be many asking where are the ‘more’ grass roots activists and heaven forbid a party that claims representation of social justice would include in its ranks of MP’s an actual Beneficiary or any of those who have given their labour over years to the economy for low wages…
imo this is a subtly sexist post…it totally overlooks/ ignores the role of the woman co-leader of the Greens Metiria Turei
….as some have predicted …the male commentators and msm will totally sideline her
…forget about her stirling efforts working with Mana/Int and Laila Harre and Hone Harawira on her Bill for meals in schools
…of course the male Left has still got a lot to learn as regards covert sexism
Go Green! Go Mana/Int! Go NZF! Go Labour!…in a Left coalition to beat jonkey nact which is destroying this country!
There’s nothing brilliant about it, it’s just a sad indictment of how the left of politics will never ever meet in the middle. Its our way or no way. A fractured, bickering, hopeless mess of staunching each other out as to who’s the most left of Stalin.
Where as National are very right of centre they have done a brilliant job of pretending they are not. Their first 3 years were more or less spent sitting on the fence doing nothing (Much to NZ’s detrement). But as we are starting to see privatising public services like prisons, state housing and now mental health is what they have been gagging to do for years. And Privatising = profit for shareholders.
National have swallowed all comers and more or less rule in first past the post style and because of their money and their influence in ensuring the media never reveal anything of substance the public love it.
The Greens will recapture their losses with people who will vote for them because they will cosy up to National, but in voting Green it will give them some kind of conscience in doing so.
But the silver lining to this dark cloud, if there is one, is if it becomes Blue Greens then maybe the real estate will open up for everyone else left of centre, that’s if the left can ever get their shit together that is!
I don’t think I have voted for Labour since 1983-84 elections…save for a local seat because there were no alternatives.And I would say there is a fair few people who think just like me.
Labour to me , ….is like having endured storm conditions for too long ….and looking out the windows to see the sun trying to shine through but being inundated with torrential rain all over again.
Those neo liberal subversives such as Roger Douglas , Mike Moore , and Richard Prebble had had their fun wrecking the country and gleefully went off and formed ACT – the most anti – worker , anti union , anti welfare state party this country had ever known.
But not being content with that , they ensured that their backers and Lieutenants stayed behind in Labour to further entrench their treasonous legacy’s…
And 35 years later that party is still infected by that insidious virus.
They have done NOTHING to countermand that element within that party.
NOTHING WHATSOEVER .
They are quite content to go through leader after leader and lose election after election to preserve that confederate presence in that party and to advance and ensure the neo liberal agenda is adhered to.
There is no real difference’s between a neo liberal in National or Labour – barring peripheral issues that are of no real import – and are only done to give the illusion of difference.
The neo liberal cares not what party it finds itself in – so long as neo liberalism is served.
……………………………………………………………………………………
So , strategically , one could assume that there is merit in the Greens and NZ First …developing a closer relationship , that the issues raised above can work in their favour…and even in fact become a viable alliance with National – simply if only to curtail and hamper the excesses of the type of behavior we are seeing currently.
It would curtail and neuter much of the damage being caused by this current roundup of National , and , as there is a steadily building weariness and backlash against Key – despite the constant polls rammed down our throats about how ‘ popular ‘ he is all the time…
The signs are there that in fact in large sectors of society , he actually isn’t. The humiliating loss of Northland is a case in point.
But for this to happen…Act would have to finally be laid to rest – and all the signs are there of its un-sustainabilty and demise…
The conservatives have been short lived and not an option , the Maori party…ambles compliantly along…but there are signs that if they could…they would wield more influence which would make the far right wingers in National heave with illness…
Peter Dunne…limps on , fecklessly as ever….
It may transpire that tactically …National will have not much option in future…and strategically… not only would a combined force of the Greens / NZ First supplant Labour rendering them even more irrelevant than they are now….but also reel in so many of the excesses that for so long in this country have been left to fester and become socially gangrenous open sores.
Well said WK 🙂 Can’t add anything to that summation.
Reaching out to National is like sticking your hand in a meat-grinder.
That comment about the behaviour of Labour members when Hone lost his seat is worrying. They’re mean AND stupid – Labour has become so establishment oriented it really does seem like they’re just going to pass into oblivion.
Chris Trotter made the comment recently about needing a very charasmatic leader to cut through the huge media bias against the left – it doesn’t look like there is anyone in Labour who could do that but maybe the Greens have just found someone who can
“even if the left wing activist base walks”
It’s called democracy folks. If you are a member of a political party and more people in your party vote for another candidate than the one you wanted, you suck it up for the good of the party and what it stands for.
At the local meeting most of the core greens wanted Hague and it seemed new green members wanted Shaw. Felt like a lot of new greens attending. I think people see Shaw as able to bring new members into the party.
I just hope he’s not a Crosby Textor Trojan.
As an older green, my vote was for Shaw. I heard one of his parliamentary speeches around Christmas, it had wit and graciousness. If nothing else he will raise the level of debate and hopefully show up even more the inadequacy and petty spitefulness of the Nats. One of the strengths of the greens is their ability to renew themselves, none of them hold onto the trappings of power so tightly that they stultify the party, unlike so many of the Labour MPs
Getting National to be serious about climate change is like getting oil companies to get serious about solar power
Exactly, Shaw’s overtures are doomed.
To succeed National will demand so many accommodations within any agreement that it will simply make the Greens into a standing joke amongst the environmental movement.
Whatever is the man thinking?
If you were John Key, what would you prefer?
Batting off full frontal attacks,or
Deflecting reasonable sounding overtures that appeal to higher ideals.
If Key offers any meaningful accommodation to the Greens on climate change, (he won’t), it’ll be full frontal attacks from the agricultural and corporate sector that he’ll have to fend away. And that’s what he will always prefer to avoid.
At best a Key government, or the National Party, will deceive, procrastinate and deceive again. Shaw won’t get a meaningful result. The Greens existing support base will be easily smart enough to recognise the inevitable snow job from the Nats when it arrives.
Besides, the Nats have invested much in vilifying the Green and environmental brand. It provides a useful avenue and means of dog whistle politics toward the red-neck demography.
imo National will always prefer to maintain this ability and so will present any concession in regard to climate as coming from themselves alone, not resulting from an arm twisting from greenie watermelon hippy crystal gazers.
It’s academic anyway, because until the likes of the science denying neoliberal puppet masters in the New Zealand Institute or climate denying organisations such as Federated Farmers have a road to Damascus revelation, National will simply tinker with the issue.
Richard, you seem to misunderstand Shaw’s intent. What he’s arguing is that climate change, like NZ Super, is too important to be a political football, and that the Nats should join a genuine attempt at cross-party policy-making. As he’s made clear (“the free market is dead”) his election as co-leader will make coalition with Nats no more likely than it was before the election.
I have been disturbed by the Greens continuing overtures to Labour, despite their actions in Te Tai Tokerau making it clear they are happy to throw their “allies” in opposition under a bus in a futile attempt to look more “moderate” to the mass media. Any offer to work with Labour should come with a disclaimer that any drift back towards their neo-liberal habits would be called for what it is, and staunchly opposed. I am also disturbed by Shaw’s call to triple the membership of the Greens over 2 years (sustainable growth? I doubt it). But as I’ve said in other comments on TDB, let’s base any criticism of our allies on facts, not innuendo, scuttlebutt, and misrepresentation.
already there are Nacts ready to jump ship to the Greens….and this number will increase as climate change worsens
….so really who cares if jonkey nact and corporate puppeteers wont play ball with the Greens ….because Nact voters will ….with their feet
However Greens must not compromise their principles and I dont think they will …because there is no need …the voters will come to them because of Green principles
1.)Metiria Turei the senior Green co-leader has already made it plain that the Greens are political partners with Mana/Int… as has Laila Harre
2.) Shaw couldnt have made it clearer that a coalition partnership with jonkey nactional is OUT of the question….but not with Labour who is a viable coalition partner for the Greens and may be necessary to win the next election
imo …the Greens should also be working with Winston and NZF….they have issues in common…eg foreign ownership, TPPA, Spy Bill
Correct and the ideal. However the major stumbling block with Labour is the neo liberal presence. If that group can be successfully sidelined , we’d have a good strong winning combination.
Then there would have to be no less – than – ideal arrangements with National..which would make us all rest so much easier.
There is so much open now, about future directions, about policy, about new and existing membership, not only within the Greens, we are still waiting for Labour to come up with their new policies and direction, after that so much discussed “review” after the last terrible defeat.
National is now desperate to stay in power, no matter what, even Matthew Hooton says this again and again, they will not shy away from making a deal with a Shaw and Turei led Green Party, should numbers next election require this.
That is the real fear and worry I have, that the Greens make deals, by prioritising climate change solutions and policy (admittedly utmost important to us all), and perhaps something, else, but by compromising on social policy.
It was the combination of environmental AND social policy that motivated me to party vote Greens last election. If the “social” will be compromised, then I see too little motivation to vote Green again.
Beneficiaries and working poor seem to be left by the wayside by all three major parties now, and this also applies to the many non voters.
There is an opportunity for a progressive party to step in and take advantage, I feel, to fill the void on the left of centre, that is increasingly being vacated, by following the general shift to the right by the bulk of remaining (middle class) voters.
Next election we may have a third of voters not bother, I fear, if the trend continues. That must be stopped, and there lies said opportunity, for some real progressive, inclusive force.
Time to look leftwards again without the Greens, who apparently don’t wish to be left or right. Time for the emergence of a progressive socialist party on the left to nudge Labour to the right, and in the process, nudging NZ First further to the right – leaving National as the rightwing fascist potential dictatorship.
One question :- Did Shaw put his hand into the meat grinder and reach out to National to publicly show everyone that even if the Greens wanted to work with the Natsis, what their reaction would be ?
Was it to show everyone publicly what would happen, despite all the devils advocacy put forward by the Natsis via the NZ media?
Comments are closed.