National's list ranking, Ctd – Blokefest

Watch the lefties go mental about the blokefest that was highlighted repeatedly on this blog. National didn’t really need a headline like this one in stuff, but they have got what they deserved.

There will be apologists saying National select the best person etc, which is all very well but there are several best persons who, in my view, aren’t any good at all and were selected.

The failure to bring good new women candidates into safe National seats and into safe list positions demonstrates the absolute failure of the much vaunted candidates college. The College scarcely met, and there was no aggressive recruitment of good candidates from around New Zealand. The president, who is ultimately responsible, dithered around like a silly old hen, more concerned with his own little problems with females, and never got around to organising it until it was far too late to get good women into caucus. There was no shoulder tapping of good women, and this has let everyone down.

At this rate it looks like National will have fewer women in caucus after the election than before. Another act of strategic stupidity.


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • diabolos

    I’m a leftie mate – and i dont have a problem with a lot of blokes at all (and not for the same reasons as Chris Carter…).

    If blokes got chosen blokes got chosen – full stop – it isnt an issue to me. This utter rubbish about more women on boards and etc etc is nonsense. Its just tokenism. Germaine Greer wore rubber bodysuits and burnt her bra and so did others – we’re all so over feminism.

    You need more blokes to offset Paula Bennett and some of the other chickababes on the Benches for “National/ACT – land” anyway. Some of them have more testosterone than the blokes – its like Lesbian bikers meet Maggie Thatcher with a tad of ruby wax on speed thrown in – with moustaches at times.

    I do hope National doesnt go soft and become tokenist again .. they got rid of Pansy – a return to tokenism would be very crass …

  • simon f

    Mr Slater,

    I should firstly like to state that I enjoy your blog immensely, and check it frequently for updates. And for the most part I tend to agree with the views expressed thereon. And I have also never known you to delete the postings of your contributors, a policy from which those at Red Alert and the Standard could learn a great deal.

    But I disagree on this point which is, I think, that ‘in this day and age’ women ought to be more greatly represented if only in order that the National Party should no longer fall victim to cries of ‘misogyny,’ ‘bigotry’ and ‘chauvinism’ from its Liberal opponents.

    But if we express a preference for women, would it be ‘fair’ (a term over which the left like to claim exclusive ownership) to tell an equally talented and dedicated young man that he is prevented from serving by virtue of his gender? These are not the principles of the party I should like to support.

    And, with respect, I do not understand why we ought to abandon the guiding principle of meritocracy in pursuit of such a dubious end for, let us not forget, the target voting bloc for national is not those members of the left who believe that endless affirmative action will resolve everything, but rather those fiscal conservatives who believe in rewarding the efforts of the talented and diligent. So what if the left takes shots at the composition of party list? What difference should it make? I should consider it the sincerest possible form of flattery that the selections made should evoke a reaction from the very useless, liberal establishment media and an indication that the Left fear those selected might actually prove to be effective conservatives. In any case, my point is this: that attempts to appease one’s opponents tend never to end well and, in the end, only play into their hands and serve as distraction from the all important task ‘getting things done.’

    • I understand your points but there are several of those women who based on merit deserve a far higher ranking than say Scott Simpson, a thoroughly undeserving candidate. Karen Rolleston, Leonie Hapeta, Claudette Hauiti and Linda Cooper are all far better qualified as candidates than a backroom weasel of little merit. Scott Simpson even had Alasdair Thompson as a referee and his suporters who rang around the delegates, including that bastion od non-sexism Don Brash, all ran the line that it was time for a bloke in Coromandel.

      If we truly did run a meritocracy then the list would look very different, with many of the women much higher up.

      • simon f

        Thank you for your response. I don’t know all that terribly much about the candidates selected as I have not met them or encountered them personally, and so I cannot really comment on the veracity or otherwise of what you have said above. But I would not be surprised if there were not some truth to it.

        In that case I am sorry for any female candidates who ‘got shafted’ and held back by their ineffective male peers. I must say that I don’t think women have an easy job of it in business or politics, but surely, the answer is more meritocracy rather than the adoption of ‘preferential policies’ which create less? In a perfect world, everyone would live in fear of the ‘axe’ of meritocracy. But so often its swings tend to miss those whose organisation would benefit most from their departure.

      • simon f

        one final point – true, the ‘axe’ of merticracy may at times miss its mark, but at such times should we not sharpen its blade and correct its aim rather than adopt instruments which are, in my view a good deal less accurate and more hazardous to those close by? There are a great many of our elected officials who would resist this. But why we must we, the taxpayers continually support and endure (as Mr Slater has so accurately characterised such people) such vast quantities of political ‘deadwood?’

      • Mattyman

        I completely agree with Whale on this one, Paul Quinn could be dropped all together. Nice bloke, not suited to politics in my opinion. Alan Peachey has had his time. Aaron Gilmore hasn’t really fired and how did Kanwaljit Bakshi get moved up?

        I truly hope Leonie Hapeta gets rid of Ian ‘rooter’ Less-Galloway. She’s a true grass roots community candidate. Claudette should have been higher up. same with Linda Cooper I mean at 74 and Kanwaljit Bakshi at 38? Have they gone mad?

      • diabolos

        Matty .. its all about tokenism these days … nothing more – thats what makes the list rankings. All parties suffer from the same pc rubbish malaise … a

        Meritocracy is a foreign concept to the oligarchs who run this country at present

        The time to pay the piper is coming for all parties very soon … you reap what you sow.

    • diabolos

      Couldnt agree more – and i’ve read Cams response. Respect the fact that cam may know these people better than others do but thats democracy isnt it.

      Saying that more women should be represented is usually described as a leftist sentiment. It isnt at all. Its tokenism by most peoples definition.

      In memoriam to Alasdair Thompson … “only women bleed” as the famous rock song goes.

      If you want quotas – then we descend the slippery slope to hell … for any party … we end up with all sorts of things … and ultimately … its all only cams opinion. He may after all not be right. Despite what sycophants may say.

    • diabolos

      Sharpening axes – etc etc.

      I can imagine Wagners “the ring cycle” accompanying this particular discourse … I thought we let the Market do the sorting out .. the neoliberal way – instead we talk about interventionism under another guise.

      Is this the Soviet National Party – with Cam Slater as one of the Political Commissars – giving two people one rifle in case the other one gets hit (little bit like their social policies).

      I see a lot of cynical parallels with Stalins Soviet experiment in this Key Administration and supporting blogging apparatchik apparatus.

      • simon f

        I note the accusation from Mr ‘diabolos’ that my call for a return to meritocracy is in fact ‘apparatchik interventionism’ by another name (something which he, as a self described ‘leftie’ no doubt knows a great deal more about about than I). He may describe my view in whatever manner he should choose, and it is his prerogative to do so, but I do not think this portrayal to be anything less than a misrepresentation, chiefly for the reason that I cannot see how the promotion of the incompetent, whatever their gender, can be regarded as a hallmark of an efficient ‘political market,’ if you will. What Mr diabolos wrongly construes as a call for ‘interventionism’ is, in fact, a plea for the removal of those barriers to the promotion or dismissal of an individual based on their performance.

        Once meritocracy is agreed as good and necessary, the argument then revolves about how individual performance should be measured, which can also prove tiresome for those involved, but if it were to be had it would at least be a sign that we would be getting somewhere as opposed to being without any real commonality to speak of, as we are at present.

        Mr Slater’s point (and I hope that I have understood him correctly, for I will happily heed correction in the alternative) is chiefly a practical one; that National runs the risk of losing political capital by having as few female MPs as it does at present and should therefore favour women in its selection process in order to avoid accusations of misogyny, from the Left, etc. I did not and do not dispute the validity of this thesis. It is a sound and reasonable point, for which reason I chose to respond as I did, by seeking to draw his attention to the inevitable who/whom question which arises from this thesis, which asks, in effect, why one should bother to elicit support from hose who aren’t within one’s electorate and the policies of whom are not only ineffective but actively detrimental to the interests of those whom they purport to represent, to which Mr Slater responded sensibly, just as I had imagined he would. Thanks to him once again for taking the time to run this blog and for responding to his contributors.

  • diabolos

    Here is the link to a previous post by Cam …

    He describes in graphic terms a very robust female ACT aspirant as returning to her (and i quote) “Income, Rooting and boozing …” after toying with the possibility of politics at the coalface …

    Yes – National needs more of the old sheilas in its list. Some of these chicks refer to “drifting in and out of consciousness (at least 6 times) thinking about rooting” while reading blog posts. I can hear the sound of guns loading, triggers being “cocked” cousins being married – lawyers being deflowered – and the sweet stench of gunpowder as it trickles like treacle down the sweaty …. ” concentrate reader – this is not a private fantasy.

    This is a measure of the quality and family values we want in our hallowed halls. Jesus would be proud. So hard – so dominant – so macho – so … yeah lets have the womenfolk doin thea bit fo da plantation yeah!

    I thought we were beyond the sexism thing guys – i thought the right had it sorted – but in the end you are still stuck with what you would normally call Leftist norms.

    Get over yourselves. This is after all the 21st century you and your compatriots helped to build. Live with it.

  • daldy

    Cam I want to thank you for sticking up for the girls. It is a disgrace that in the 21st century with women making up 51% of the population that there will only be 25% women in the National Party Caucus following the election. National is going backwards. Goodfellow was interviewed on radio about the list and his explanation to the media question “where are the women ” was totally pathetic.

    • diabolos

      Oh for gods sake – and he will probably crucify me for this – Cam isnt sticking up for the women … he’s exercising political expediency. Just like transforming an “assymetric battle with a blogger” which he miserably failed at with Mallard – to a victory…. in a manner reminiscent of Goebbels, Gaddafi and others.

      He’s just making political capital. Read his hunting blogs – see his hunting pictures .. depictions of an unsmiling man, dead animals and a gun fixation.

      Nice Guy – but he’s not advocating for ladies in the workplace.

    • diabolos

      Point is .. he’s not sticking up for the girls.

      He is saying and telling you and all and sundry the girls should have been elevated to the level he thinks they should be.

      And he is impugning the person elevated above them.

      Democracy in action i guess.

  • whalewatcher

    I think we all have quickly forgotten the 9-year Labour Dykocracy.
    H1 – a liar, now well-gone. Halleluia, halleluia. please take Peter too – oh, that’s right, he’s persona-non-grata in the USA after the Hawaiian toilet fiasco
    H2 – no electoral mandate yet wielded far too much power
    the dental nurse Annette King and her dishonest husband Ray Lind – remember how Silent T sacked the Hawkes Bay DHB??
    who’s that labour lesbian with the man-name? Steve Chadwick? spare me..
    Ruth ‘drink drive’ Dykson

    .. and their appointees – chief justice, speaker of the house (the useless Wilson woman – couldn’t control anything), Governor General Kath Tizard, and on it goes..

    Now, for National: well, Muldoon had Waring, then Mrs Wood the Party President.
    we have all had Jenny from Ashburton, the Mother of the Nation..
    ..and talking of mothers on Father’s Day, don’t forget the Mother of all Budgets, Ruth what’s-her-name.

    So, National is not, on history, misogynist.
    But maybe at present they are – I have no inside knowledge.

    But the point I am trying to make with the above roll-call is that National have had talented women in power over at least 30 years, so would seem to select women on merit

    • diabolos

      So mate – what is your point – you have a dyke watchlist ….

      Dont tell me about your policy on women – its Cam you have to convince dude.

      Jenny and Ruth would be good to plug a hole in a dyke – thats about all they are good for … expensive overrated trollopes they are …

      • National isn’t misogynist, but it is inept. There are male plonkers well above capable female candidates and that si my point.

  • diabolos

    Sorry just still chuckling at your attack mate … did you know that Waring was a dyke .. a carpet clutcher – an uphill gardener and an ardent feminist.

    As to National being misogynist … well Cam thinks they are so take it “up” with him old son … jeez i cant solve all your problems for you. Work out your message please …

    And by the way – calling your chicks ‘talented’ is stretching things a bit (pardon the expression) – more like “interview with the female vampires” would be more to the point.

  • oldlogger

    A lefty with a sense of humor! Still laughing mate.

    • diabolos

      Oldlogger – i like this blog increasingly – Cam infuriates me quite often and i’ve had to wipe spat coffee and other food items off the computer screen when i’ve read some of his more provocative posts.

      However – he shows a real willingness to listen to alternative points of view. Its a privilege being allowed to come onto his blog and to offer comments .. but he doesnt seem to get too precious about it all. Thats gold in my book.

      Its just a pity the bugger is so often wrong (just joking) …

      Lefties are people too – and we do have something to offer

  • Spanishbride

    Totally off topic but I have just discovered the awful truth!
    Australia has taken over NZ by stealth. It’s true. I don’t know when we became a state of Australia but my Aussie father discovered that it had happened this afternoon.
    My company just last week partnered with Murals Your Way so my father decided to order an Australian scene for himself. He entered Australian Ports into the search engine and you will never guess what popped up :)

    • Great. Now when the Aussies give the endangered Canberra Woodpecker the heave and replace her with Tony Abbott, New Zealand might get a decent PM as well!

  • Ben


    Your point might be true and valid about the Bloke fest (depending on a readers point of view). I do have a question though, what about the (the seemingly numerous amount of) young Women in the Young Nats as up and comings into the Parliamentary Wing?

    Might be just me, but it is rather odd that indeed there are not more Women entering the “List” when there seems to be a healthy representation in the Youth Wing.

    (Then again ignorance is bliss?)

  • Sorry to be a David Farrar parrot but if you look at the gains in women candidates up the list such as Paula Bennett, Amy Adams, Nikki Kaye and Jo Goodhew, it is interesting. They are ranking these women higher than last time. But still they are underrated. Bennett should be ranked in the top 10 instead of Tolley and Adams, Goodhew and Kate Wilkinson should be about 3 to 8 slots higher.

    Though if you are talking about tokenism, look no further than Hekia Parata or what every she calls herself. Look at the pasting she got on The Nation. Also Anne Tolley after the National Standards Fiasco.

    Interestingly the only woman to be demoted was Jacqui Dean. Then again explicable when she never visits her electorate, which representing is her only real role in National. Ranking her above Maggie Barry, was a serious mistake. Barry has a lot to offer National.