Chris Trotter

Chris Trotter writes about the Green/Labour SNAFU…it is clear he is as perplexed as me as to why they are attacking a leaker when the opposition lives off of leaks.

WHAT A CURIOUS INVERSION of the conventional political playbook. A conservative prime minister defending the rights of the news media. The same Green Party that barred media representatives from just about every session of its annual general meeting championing a journalist damsel in distress. The leader of a populist party which owes its very existence to the successful exploitation of leaks exposing scandals, demanding the head of a political rival for (allegedly) leaking information and exposing a scandal. And, not to be outdone, a Labour Party hell-bent on making public the private communications between a journalist and her source.

If there’s a common principle linking these actions, then it’s extremely well hidden!  Read more »

Chris Trotter has written on Bowalley Road (hence the link) an interesting premise come 2014.

Could it be that unions are going the way of the dinosaurs:

Since the emergence of capitalism, workers seeking higher pay and safer workplaces have banded together in guilds and unions to pressure their employers for a better deal. That has been the approach of the American labor movement for the past 200 years.

That approach, however, has begun to change. It’s not because unions think collective bargaining is a bad idea but because workers can’t form unions any more — not in the private sector, not at this time. There are some exceptions: Organizing continues at airlines, for instance, which are governed by different organizing rules than most industries. But employer opposition to organizing has become pervasive in the larger economy, and the penalties for employers that violate workers’ rights as they attempt to unionize are so meager that such violations have become routine. For this and a multitude of other reasons, the share of unionized workers in the private sector dropped from roughly one-third in the mid-20th century to a scant 6.6 percent last year. In consequence, the share of the nation’s economy constituted by wages has sunk to its lowest level since World War II, and U.S. median household income continues to decline.  Read more »

Chris Trotter makes an astute observation on the CTU and their so-called muscle:

[T]he involvement of the CTU was clearly no help. CTU president, Helen Kelly, is always reminding us that, “with 350,000 New Zealand union members in 40 affiliated unions”, the CTU is “the united voice for working people and their families in New Zealand.” Hmmm. If that was true, all she needed to do was ask every one of those union members to sign the “Keep Our Assets” petition and everyone else could have gone home.  Read more »

Chris Trotter discusses the failed Green/Labour petition to re-write an election result.

The attempt to use the Citizens Initiated Referendum process to halt the Government’s partial privatisation programme was always a risky strategy. Political parties, in particular, take a huge risk in associating their names with operations in which so many things, over which they have no control, can go wrong. And now, of course, they have gone wrong – badly wrong – and at the worst possible moment.

It’s the perception that the “Keep Our Assets” petition has failed, on the very eve of the Government learning how much Mighty River Power’s shares are worth, that’s done the damage.

Political insiders may know that CIRs almost always fall short on the first official count. That someone has only to shift flats, and write their new address on the petition form, for the Clerk of the House to disallow that person’s signature. Unfortunately, 90 percent of the voters don’t know. If John Key tells them that one-in-four of the petition’s signatures are “fake” – they’re quite likely to believe him.  Read more »

Matthew Hooton has commented on David Shearer’s previously secret offshore slush fund:

Mr Shearer says he should have declared his allegedly untouched Chase Bank account when he became an MP in 2009 and every year since.

His comments indicate the account held at least NZ$50,000 on January 31, 2013, or US$41,967.  When he became an MP in 2009, a US$41,967 account was worth over NZ$65,000.

That means poor old Mr Shearer has lost nearly 25% just in foreign exchange movements (see table).  His actual losses are even greater, given interest rate differentials between the US and New Zealand.

We also know that Mr Shearer has another deposit account of over $NZ50,000 with ASB.  He also has a mortgage with Westpac over one or both of his Pt Chevalier and Avondale homes, or his jointly owned property in beautiful Whananaki.

This is why the story is so strange.  Read more »

Yesterday I was thinking about Chris Trotter’s post about the factions and the post at The Standard by Eddie, also about factions.

It got me thinking. This was Helen Clark’s legacy. This was her construct and her gift to Labour.

Read more »

Eddie blogs at The Standard about three factions of the Labour party.

It’s interesting how little understanding there is of the state and politics within the Parliamentary Labour Party. A lot of the coverage of Labour’s internal workings has tended to personalise the tension – it’s been focused on Shearer vs Cunliffe without any questions about what lies beneath.

As always, there’s a lot more to it. Most of the drama within Labour since the last election can be put down to the power struggle between the Parliamentary party’s three factions. I think it’s time to shine a light on what’s going on so members can better judge the behaviour of their parliamentary representatives.

Questions of ideology, loyalty, and personal advancement all play their part in the makeup of Labour’s three factions. Each faction has a core group of hard support as well as a handful of soft supporters who can and have switched allegiances from time to time. This is much looser and informal than the Australian system of factions.

S/He labels the factions as:

• The Right
• The Left
• The Careerists  Read more »

Chris Trotter writes in a  post entitled “Lies, Damned Lies and imagined Conversations”:

“So, now the Labour caucus is divided into three, roughly equal groups”, explains Charles. “Goff’s and King’s rear-guard of has-beens and Beagle Boys – with Mr Mumbles as their figurehead. David’s loyal ten, and Robertson’s cast of the young and the restless. You must have at least one of the other factions, plus your own, to mount a successful coup.

“And Goff persuaded Robertson to throw in his lot with Shearer?”

“Yeah, that’s right, Heather, he did.”

“But I just don’t get it!” Helen responds. “Surely the more sensible combination was Cunliffe-Robertson – not Shearer-Robertson. I mean, even a Robertson/Ardern leadership combination, with Cunliffe in Finance, makes more sense than this present mess?”

“Why do you think I’m here in New York, Helen? None of it makes any sense!”

Heather puts down her knife and fork and beckons her companions closer.

“What would happen if Shearer was to be forced out of the leadership by something other than a leadership vote?”  Read more »

Chris Trotter echoes my thoughts on the Shane Jones affair:

Here’s a question for Labour. When confronted with evidence raising serious questions about the judgment of a senior caucus member, what should the leader do?

Should he measure the member’s actions against his own beliefs about what constitutes right and proper conduct in someone holding a ministerial warrant? Examining the facts of the case, should he ask himself how he would have acted differently? Should he take moral stock of the environment in which the member’s actions occurred? Paying special attention to the actions of the member’s staff, should he ask himself whether he would have felt comfortable working alongside them? Would he have trusted their advice?

Or, should he simply outsource the whole job to the auditor-general?

As we know Shearer sent requested the A-G look at this issue. Perhaps because he lacked the courage to deal with it internally.  Read more »