Peter Goodfellow and the Candidates College

On the weekend CNI held a regional meeting including electorate chairs. Peter Goodfellow turned up and stole an hour of the attendees time, bored them witless and sat down to complete and utter silence. He couldn’t catch the clap from a hooker let alone an audience.

At the meeting he banged on about a lot of things, but one of the things he specifically mentioned was The Candidates College. But first a little history.

Exhibit 1: President's Update_2 July 2010The aftermath of the Bill English/Michelle Boag train wreck of an election result in 2002 was followed by Judy Kirk and Steven Joyce making some pretty major changes to the party, including the Candidates College. They spent a fair bit of time thinking about ensuring we had a good crop of candidates coming through to run for National. The concept is sound and used world-wide to select prime candidates and then groom them for the campaign trail.

Unfortunately Peter Goodfellow has completely failed to do anything about the candidates college for a year. Nothing. Sweet F-All. Maybe he should have dropped his extensive cruise itinerary and actually ran a few candidates college events during the time since the last conference.

I’ve had a number of college members asking is National always this useless? Good people too, people that could be good MPs who now think the party is a waste of space because one man couldn’t get off his arse and do something. Something that was a passion of the previous President, and should have been an enduring part of her legacy.

And since nothing has happened there are regional chairs that have stopped referring people to it, because they thought doing nothing was a bad way to introduce candidates to National.

If anyone needed evidence for the case of the prosecution of the president for doing nothing then his “President’s Update” Newsletter is damning and from his own pen.

The Candidates’ College committee has been meeting regularly to approve the next round of people seeking to put themselves forward as candidates. We are actively considering the best way to further enhance the Candidates’ College to yield candidates who are schooled in campaigning with speech writing and media skills but also to support their campaign managers in building vibrant teams.

Riiight, so just look at the language, “actively considering“. Weasel words for doing nothing. We are 18 months out from a general election and the Candidate’s College committee is only “actively considering” the best way to enhance the College. Instead of pontificating about how to enhance the College how about the committee and the president make the damn thing happen the way Judy Kirk and Steven Joyce envisaged. When are they actually going to do anything? Actively considering? Isn’t that an euphemism for haven’t actually got around to doing anything but might at some stage in the future?

In two weeks the party has an important decision to make with regard to the composition of the board. They can re-elect Peter Goodfellow or they can select board members with a history of achievement and progress.

Call to Action for vot­ing delegates:

  • Rank Peter Goodfellow Last
  • Pun­ish him for his record of doing nothing
  • Get a new Pres­i­dent, and see the National Party thrive
  • kehua

    Cam, if the National Party that my immediate family [14 votes]have supported for the last 4 Elections are going to continue with the ETS then we will not be supporting them at the next Election. If every decision made is made with total disregard to the true facts, and is instead twisted and ignored just to justify the ego of a stupid prick like Nick Smith, then National are in effect no different to Labour. Right now I would reluctantly vote ACT and so would my family.

  • brucewho

    Between the Caucus and Goodfellow’s WAG there will be more than enough strings pulled. Cam – beware the Hobson Board chair

  • peterwn

    Kehua – If anyone thinks that National / ACT can win an election with ACT / Roger Douglas type policies they have another think coming. National needs centre and just right of centre voters to stay in power. John Key and the National Caucus knows this only too well. This is precisely why they are continuing to support ETS. Nick Smith has the balls to front the policy and be its lightning rod. And before criticising Nick, people should just look at his solid majority in what should be a safe Labour seat.

    I just cannot understand why Bill English and Michelle Boag keep copping the flak for the 2002 debacle. IMO, National still had not recovered from the effects of Muldoonism then – this very seriously damaged the party. Then Bolger’s government did some loony things in the 1990′s. For example Bill Birch allowed IRD to get away with introducing such a harsh penalties scheme that Mike Cullen had to ease it off. This particularly affected small businesses nd similar people who would usually be core National supporters. And if anyone thinks Nick Smith’s ETS support was crazy, them Maurice Williamson’s road privatisation proposal was even more crazy. To put it bluntly it was a LAND GRAB, grabbing land outside your gate so the monopoly owner can screw you over for using it. Worse sill they would have screwed the utilities that run on the road which would screw even more out of home owners via higher utility tariffs. Is it any wonder that National was out on its ear in 1999 and had no real chance of a comeback in 2002. And the twit who went screaming off to the Serious Frauds Office about the alleged misuse of a donation put the last nails into National’s coffin in mid 2002. IMO Michelle did what she could, I do not think any other possible Presidential candidate could have pulled off a victory then – there was just far too much damage with Muldoonism, the IRD and roads issues under Bolger, and the SFO incident.

  • kehua

    peterwn Correct, it would fuck me right off to have my vote in any way connected to failed pigfarmer Roger Douglas, but both labour and the M Party support the myth of Global Warming. I will not support a Rort and I know a lot of folk who think similar.