Helen Clark

The Herald has an article asking how we can reclaim Waitangi Day.

It is then full of a whole lot of liberal guilt and anguish. But I tell you what, I’m over all the b.s. promulgated by Maori intent on looking backwards to 1840 instead of looking forwards.

So for Waitangi Day I am going to have a Brown Out. I’m not going to talk about it, blog about it or comment on the annual gnashing and wailing of teeth held at Waitangi.

The only people really interested in Waitangi are the 1%…the elites of Maori and politicians. Foreverybody else it is the first Statutroy holiday and we hope for a fine day, good surf and great company not all the racial bikering that Waitangi Day has become.

Helen Clark did the right thing is staying away after she was insulted…”The Crown” should stay away permanently and while we are at it ignore the Ratana cult too.

Ngapuhi would be better off spending the day working out solutions to their appalling child abuse statistics and awful housing situation instead of pandering to elites at Waitangi.

As far as I am concerned the Treaty of Waitangi is an interesting historical document of as much relevance as the Treaty of Versailles to modern New Zealand. Both documents were meant to bring peace and instead they promoted divsion and conflict.

It is time to consign it all to the history books and start building a modern, relevant society in New Zealand not one focused on grievance and outrage.

In the early 80s before the 1984 election Labour’s opposition was populated with thinkers.

Roger Douglas, David Lange, Michael Bassett, Geoffrey Palmer, Peter Tapsell, Mike Moore and Richard Prebble.

They didn’t just oppose Muldoon, they came up with some solutions to the morass the country found itself in. They showed an enormous tallent and prodigious thinking power. That powerful opposition went on to become a reforming government making dramatic lasting positive changes to the New Zealand economy crippled by Muldoon’s legacy and global economic conditions.

Even Helen Clark cut her teeth in politics at that time.

If Labour are going to challenge National seriously rather than sit back and expect to win in 2014 then they need to show the same sort of vision and ideas that those aforementioned lumnaries of Labour showed.

The problem I have is that I just don’t think there is a single one of the current Labour caucus that remotely qualifies in the same league.

There certainly isn’t a Richard Prebble and a book like “I’ve been Thinking“.

Hel me out here readers, is there anyone in the Labour caucus right now that will have such a dramatic positive effect on New Zealand like that of the 4th Labour government?

Chris Trotter in a DomPost opinion piece has called out David Shearer and Labour for their hypocrisy and racism over the Crafar Farms deals:

It was all the more perplexing, then, to hear Opposition leader David Shearer declaring his and the Labour Party’s opposition to the sale. It’s simply inconceivable that Mr Shearer is unaware of the MFN prohibition against denying China the same right to buy land as the nations that bought upwards of 650,000 hectares of our national patrimony exercised when Helen Clark was Prime Minister, and Mr Shearer’s friend (and former boss) Phil Goff was the Minister of Trade.

To avoid the inevitable charges of rank hypocrisy and populist opportunism, Mr Shearer needed to accompany his statement opposing the sale with an announcement that Labour was committed, immediately on regaining office, to repudiating the New Zealand-China FTA and tightening up the legislation regulating overseas investment.

I’m still waiting for those other shoes to drop. And, frankly, I think I’ll go on waiting. Why? Because I simply don’t believe Labour is about to abandon its long-standing commitment to free trade. Nor am I confident Mr Shearer is any more willing to court the fury and retaliatory trade restrictions of the Chinese government than Mr Key. Both are well aware that this country’s future prosperity is inextricably bound up with China’s.

If foreign ownership of our land was something successive governments wished to restrict, they should have legislated against it before they embraced the doctrine of free trade.

 

via the tipline

via the tipline:

via the tipline

Chris Trotter looks at David Shearer’s first major speech and his metaphor of turning the page:

To “turn the page”, in common English usage, means “to stop thinking about and dealing with something”. As in: “Your divorce came through over a year ago, it’s time to turn the page”.

So what is Mr Shearer so keen to stop thinking about? What’s he so tired of dealing with? Is it Helen Clark’s Labour Party? The Labour Party that Phil Goff inherited but couldn’t, or wouldn’t, change? Turning a page on that would make a huge difference.

But has he?

A party leader reveals a great deal about his character and intentions through the people he chooses to sit alongside him, and those he relegates to the back-benches. If Mr Shearer really is determined to stop thinking about and dealing with Helen Clark, his ‘Shadow Cabinet’ ought to show it.

What it actually discloses, however, is that the Shearer-led Labour Party is more about continuity than change. Mr Shearer’s two big winners, Grant Robertson and Jacinda Ardern, though certainly younger than Ms Clark’s generation of politicians, have yet to demonstrate the slightest ideological deviance from her “social-democratic” prescriptions.

Some of Mr Shearer’s other picks: David Parker, Clayton Cosgrove, Shane Jones, Nanaia Mahuta, Su’a William Sio, Trevor Mallard, Phil Goff, Annette King and Damien O’Connor; suggest a greater willingness to acknowledge the ideals and aspirations of his more conservative caucus colleagues. This could presage a turning away from the social-liberalism that cost Labour so dearly in Ms Clark’s final term, although the inclusion of David Cunliffe, Phil Twyford, Charles Chauvel, Lianne Dalziel, Chris Hipkins, Darien Fenton and Clare Curran in the Shadow Cabinet, points to the rather mundane conclusion that, more than any burning desire to turn over a new leaf, Mr Shearer’s choices reflect the need for “rejuvenation” and the balancing of caucus factions.

No page turning there…same old, same old is Trotter’s conclusion on the personnel changes. But what about the policy changes?

In pledging to “grow the pie”, Mr Shearer’s speaking in code to New Zealand’s wealthiest men and women. He is telling them that they need not fear a future Labour Government. Wages will continue to be subsidized by Working For Families, and the government will pour millions into scientific research and development. Mr Shearer will use the additional revenue flowing into the state’s coffers from innovative new business ventures to boost spending on education and health. The new jobs created by these business will reduce the government’s welfare obligations, allowing it to repay debt and rebuild surpluses.

If you’re asking yourself: “Weren’t these the economic and social policies of Ms Clark and Dr Michael Cullen?” The answer is: “Yes, they were.”

Mr Shearer and the Labour Party aren’t turning the page forward – they’re turning it back.

I could be reading Chris incorrectly but I get the distinct impression that his feeling towards the prospects of Labour and their new fondness for page turning is distinctly brown bread.

The nominations were unequivocal.

Duncan Garner – one commenter notes:

…knew there was nothing of note in the “tea tapes”, so while he had opportunity to do some real journalism and ask real questions that affect the nation he couldn’t get tea bags from his mind.

Patrick Gower – Inventory2 notes:

for his tirade against “dirty deals” under MMP, which all happened to involve right-leaning parties, whilst ignoring the fact that Labour kept Jim Anderton in Wigram for years by standing dud candidates, and that the Greens were openly encouraging people to give the electorate votes to Labour, and in the case of Kevin Hague, actually bragging about voting for another candidate rather than for himself. Had Gower been as acid-tongued towards the Left as he was to the Right, he could have been nominated for best journalist; as it stands he is a partisan hack.

Brian Rudman – constant whining about the spending of more and more public money on his pet projects, notably a theatre.

Barry Soper – One commenter summarises:

He has a cultivated, pompous accent, wears bow ties and has created the neologistic title of Chief Political Reporter. Just plain dislikeable as a person.

Second, he is demonstrably thick. No explanation required and his tiresome waffle which plagiarises the analysis of others dilutes the quality of the Radio Network commentary.

Thirdly he is a Helen Clark sycophant. I recall him saying on several occasions that Prime Minister Key had approached him and said “You don’t like me Barry do you” to which his sagacious and insightful advice had been something like ” you should study Helen Clark and learn how to be Prime Minister”.

 Loading ...

via the tipline

Helen’s Christmas greeting has been leaked.

via the tipline