Who on earth wrote James Shaw’s speech and why do they still have a job?
But then came poor old James Shaw, the newly minted Green Party co-leader. His caucus was not so well trained at laughing as National and Labour.
His valiant efforts met with a wall of silence. Shaw tried every trick in the book, suitably cushioned with earnestness about the perils of trade and climate change, or “climate changed” as he has now coined it. He waxed poetic, speaking of Bill English “learning his frugal values as a young man growing up in the vast, desolate landscapes and the cruel, frozen winters of the New Zealand Treasury.”
He made a joke, although it was a bit like driving through Pokeno at night: blink and you miss it. He referred to the US dropping tariffs on boneless meat products: “And so Tim Groser is off to Washington.” Not a single titter.
Finally he opted for the international man of mystery technique. He spoke of his time “on a micro-finance project in the Andes” when a farmer advised him “don’t try and cross the desert by walking in circles”. He went on to declare the Government was “lost in the desert of the real”.
Nobody was quite sure what he was banging on about, but happily the novice was followed by the master: NZ First leader Winston Peters.
…now I don’t want to sound like a Troll’s Troll, but who the hell allowed Shaw to run with this speech and why do they still have a job? It was clumsy, stilted and seemed terribly unrehearsed. People tell me Shaw is a great guy but this speech was poorly put together and the performance was well below par so it seems like its a coms or political strategy problem.
This terrible performance follows the Greens weird state of the nation where Met argued how not radical she was.
It is all coming across a bit amateur and soulless.
Au contraire, Martyn. Shaw’s speech was a touch of understated brilliance in the midst of opening day hooha.
Let the other leaders grandstand and posture and deliver their rants with barely disguised smarm.
What I got from Shaw was…kinda what I’d want to hear from someone who has made a commitment to show he and his party are up to the task of forming the next government.
I have never voted…because I loathe the ridiculous rhetoric that politicians spout. I have made a personal commitment to at least try not to write the whole sorry lot off at the next election….because we really need to be rid of the current incumbents.
Shaw was measured, intelligent, witty and totally engrossing.
I would vote for him if what he said yesterday translates into solid policy.
And…its MY vote he’s after.
What with Shaw’s speech, Hughes’ speech and this…
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/76808636/a-tpp-protesters-open-letter-to-steven-joyce
the Greens are looking like they have a plan.
They have good plans and always have. It is us who needs to wake up and learn what a good and intelligent party looks like. Many dismiss them because of the lies and deceit coming from this pathetic; trainwreck ;
poorly led ; national government.
Some of us woke up years ago…
They will need good plans if they want to keep their Kiwi Saver alive.
it was almost as if the speech was written for him ( Russel Norman?) ….and Shaw read it and added the jokes which didnt come off
the analysis of jonkey Nactional’s abysmal economics performance was good …but the delivery of the speech was poor
Just goes to show how different we all are. I thought the jokes were delivered perfectly…I laughed…and noticed CD sitting behind not even batting an eyelid! Had to watch the whole thing again with a friend just to check he was joking. He was…but the jokes were delivered very low key….get it?
As for his delivery…what could he have done differently…to appeal to a wider audience?
Because you know…they’ll be reading this…
jokes were not only “low key” …they were “off beam”…the timing and delivery was faltering …they missed their mark…
…shades of Red Peak flag
Not a lot, in my opinion. I thought it was a great speech, clearly outlining how the Greens differ from the tory parties, clear and to the point, with some lovely digs at, e.g. Tim Groser.
We are a small nation, we can’t very well have pools of comedic wannabe MPs just lined up. if that’s the case then Curwin would be a backbencher
Sam , you gave me a laugh mate. You are onto it. Enough said.
Sorry Martyn, disagree with you on this one.
The Greens, in all their multi coloured hues and open; intelligent agendas and plans are doing well and both Shaw and Hughes need to be commended for their honesty and strength and excellent speeches.
Now watch poor cry baby jonky donky and his elitist minions put the Greens down and call them nutters as he slides into oblivion where he belongs. I really feel sorry for his supporters who obviously have their heads buried deep in the sand of denial and ignorance. Voters ==>> wake up.
Yep, with most of commenters here. I liked the speech, despite being a loyal Labour voter.
Leave James Shaw alone, I listened to all of the speeches and Shaw stood out for NOT sounding like the others, he sounded authentic!
These are SERIOUS times and he reflected that, and jokes are the last thing I want to hear in parliament right now, it isn’t a show.
I Listened to what he SAID it was very easy to understand, and not ranting and raving, or forced down your neck.
He is the opposite type person to you Martyn you do sound like a bully picking on him because he isn’t loud, pushy and hilarious.
It is a breath of fresh air to listen to a man who isn’t high on himself being the centre of attention. The Greens have a co leadership and they both work really well together I think.
He comes across as genuine, smart and humble, a very good look in my book.
Key rants and raves, someone needs to counter him and get the message across by being heard without being a raving lunatic. In the end no one remembers what was said they just remember the raving attitude. Like an American block buster movie clutther f***k that just leaves my brain hurting.
C’mon Bomber, you’re better than this: it’s all getting a bit sad this down on James Shaw thing. Why the fuck you give a rats about Trevett’s article I can’t fathom. She was critiquing the game, the flim flam sham – the game we now despise and want over for some real policies and real action. James Shaw’s jokes weren’t belly-splitting but they were subtle and clever, qualities now in short supply as our whole body politic leans towards Amerika.
What about the content? What about what he actually said?
This is what he said, I hadn’t heard it before, and I thought it was the most pertinent critique of the TPPA setting aside the intricacies of IP, ISDS, and job losses etc etc. Shaw skewered the purported gains of the TPPA by setting them against the economic losses of disregarding climate change and demonstrating that already the costs of drought, floods etc have wiped out the so-called 2030 $2bn bonus and will continue to do so. Far bigger net economic gains will ensue from dealing with global warming not a so-called “free trade agreement”.
Anyone who is clearly enunciating the need to act on climate change NOW, both in terms of adaptation and mitigation, is deserving of bouquets not brickbats.
Sorry, Martyn, but you’re as wrong about the quality of James’s speech as were your forecasts of the outcome of the last election.
Was it raucous and knee-slapping funny? Thankfully, not. It was, however, sane, sensible, authentic and accurate, i.e. qualities in short supply in the Beehive currently.
I agree with the other commentators who responded favourably to his speech and also declare myself not a Green Party member, although I’m likely to reconsider this now.
Having now watched a number of the speeches on the PM’s statement (including the PM’s), the only one that mentioned climate change was James Shaw’s. Biggest threat looming and no mention from National, Labour, Maori, UF and ACT.
It’s 2016, we’ve just had COP21 in which the 1.5 degrees target was set and there’s barely a mention. An incredibly slow motion train wreck is in progress and everyone’s looking out the windows as they murmur that trains have always crashed and this is no bigger or different.