Simon O’Connor

Hi Simon

via email

From: Daphne
Sent: Friday, 20 January 2017 4:25 p.m.
To: Simon O’Connor <[email protected]>; B English (MIN) <[email protected]>
Subject: UN Resolution 2334

Hi Simon

As MP for my area I would like you to know that I am totally dismayed at the sponsorship of NZ by Murray McCully of UN Resolution 2334, and feel ashamed to call myself a New Zealander.

Are we now siding with terrorists? Why are we stabbing in the back the only democratic country in the Middle East? Is trade more important than principals? At the end of the day is money more important than democracy?

Please help me understand why this has happened and why I should still give my vote to National?

And if you could avoid replying with the same old cut and paste letter doing the rounds, and give me your personal insight it would be much appreciated.

Yours sincerely

Daphne xxxx

And the reply:

Read more »

Face of the day

Simon_O'Connor_MP

Simon O’Connor MP

Today’s face of the day is Tamaki MP Simon O’Connor who is Chair of the Health Select Committee and a member of the Commerce Select Committee.

A few home truths for Labour and their union paymasters

While Labour is crying corruption over what they call “cash for access” they have ignored the elephant in the room for themselves…big union money and influence in the Labour party.

Simon O’Connor helpfully points this out to them.

Read more »

Which National Caucus Members will Still be in Parliament in 2022

Following on from my post earlier today about the future of National the type of MP I think will be around in 10 years time is based on historical precedent. MPs with safe blue seats will still be there, but they will also be under 60 and obviously it depends on whether National is in power or not.

This means:

Mike Sabin
Phil Heatley
Mark Mitchell
Simon O’Connor
Jami-Lee Ross
Simon Bridges
Louise Upston
Amy Adams

Most of the other safe blue seats are held by MPs who have been around for ages and will retire, or who are too old to expect to be cabinet ministers in 2022. Some may hang around, and it will also depend on who is leader. There are younger MPs who took seats from Labour in recent elections, and they will probably not last another three elections. The exception to this is Louise Upston who has benefited from boundary changes and now has a safe blue seat.

List MPs, no matter how powerful now, will not make it back for three elections. David Farrar has pointed out that there are no List MPs from 1996 still in parliament as List MPs, and there have been no List MPs who have made it to Prime Minister.

From along term perspective, and whatever you think of their merits, the 2011 intake did not have many people like Bill English, Tony Ryall or Nick Smith who will do two terms of government at least. Age discriminates against Maggie Barry, Scott Simpson and Ian McKelvie who will in extremely advanced years in political terms in 2022.

There is going to be a major generational change in the National Party when long serving MPs like McCully, Williamson, Ryall, Smith and English move on, and older MPs in safe blue seats like Hutchinson, Tisch, Ardern, King, Wilkinson, Brownlee and Dean will also be replaced by new MPs by 2022. The big question is will they be replaced by people who can make it into cabinet like McCully, Ryall, Smith and English?

Mark Mitchell – Maiden Speech

There were many maiden speeches yesterday, I watched most of them. They were all good. Here are the links to them: Maggie Barry, Ian McKelvie, Simon O’Connor, Scott Simpson, and Jian Yang.

I am posting this one by Mark Mitchell because his comments in the middle about mental health, depression and suicide moved me…I really felt for Mark as he made this speech.

His last line too shows a commitment that many other MPs never show.

Tamaki redux – The Blokefest continues

Simon O’Connor has won the nomination for one of National’s safest seats – congratulations to Simon who won on the final ballot in the rushed contest to replace Allan Peachey after he resigned for ill health. This selection process has been exceptionally well run by the electorate chair and there has not been even a hint of skullduggery except by the President making his usual hamfisted interventions but no one in National thinks this is malicious, it is just the president has tits for hands.

The rushed selection has arguably not allowed delegates a proper chance to get to know the candidates, but the result accurately reflects the Tamaki constituency preference for a conservative male candidate who is well networked into the party, who presented fairly well and was good off-the-cuff. It also represents their desire to play it safe, by not selecting a candidate who would have represented unacceptable public relations risks for the party. There is also a suggestion that the aged males of Tamaki did not want a woman, which excluded three of the unsuccessful candidates (two of whom were female).

Commiserations to Denise Krum, who gave a great speech on the night and who presented well. It is unfortunate that she is still being tagged with the description of “former United Future president” in the Herald – she has earned the right to be described as National through and through.

Mark Thomas probably hung up his political boots last night after coming third (insiders suggested he was likely to win, and he had the support of some prominent Auckland Nats). His Party involvement has been defined by rejection at important moments –  knifed by Bolger and humiliated at the hands of the famously narrow-minded Tamaki electorate.

It looks like once again Tamaki will have to be satisfied with a less than average MP.

The Tamaki Debacle, Ctd

The race for the National aprty nomination for Tamaki is between these five:

I have been forwarded a summary of candidate biographies by the electorate chair, Andrew Hunt, who is making a good fist of the selection. HE is approachable and seems to be be running everything precisely by the rules. He has sent me the summary because candidates aren;t allowed to talk to media.

Candidate Bios

My summary will follow the same format as previous selections. Links on their names are to their iPredict stock.

Denise Krum:

Selection Record: Maungakiekie 2008 (Successfully won selection for United Future), Botany 2011 (Did not make it through Preselection),  Epsom 2011 (Dropped at 2nd ballot)

Denise is a pleasant journey woman who is unlikely to make mistakes as an MP, but also unlikely to make an impact. Her solid and stable family background and Christian values platform may endear her to some locals. A female MP for Tamaki would be a first, and probably not a bad thing either. If Krum can present more like a corporate and less like a suburban housewife, she would have the potential to win the selection.

Advantages:

  • strong track record of community involvement including getting seriously off side with Greenpeace after cleaning up the Ellerslie town centre and having them poster it with anti corporate messages.
  • Political background including father Graeme Lee being a former National MP.
  • Would help the gender balance in the National caucus

Disadvantages:

  • Political background including father Graeme Lee being a former National MP.
  • Ran for United Future in 2008
  • Was United Future Party President
  • A very attractive woman who’s causal dress sense and hippy style hair does not do her justice
  • Needs serious speech training to stop her coming across as a stoner.
  • No proven track record as a vote winner
  • Has not won a selection so far and Tamaki may not want a woman who is a repeat loser

Toni Millar:

Selection Record: To this blogs knowledge has not stood for National Selection previously

A former local councillor with a reputation for abrasiveness and bossiness. Her strong local connections 9she has lived in the electorate for decades) would make her an excellent candidate for right now, but her “spoilt child” reputation proceeds her, and will turn off some delegates. Local community groups would adore Millar as the local candidate, as she is a very social person. Not one to make a contribution to policy – think of her as a Sandra Goudie without gumboots. No longer married, but also no children, which means she would have the time to apply to the role of ribbon cutter. Would be an effective local MP and loyal to the party. Her weight might be held against her by some delegates.

Advantages

  • Proven electability as a C&R councilor on the old Auckland City Council
  • Experienced political operator who would have a head start on newbies in parliament
  • Great links into a wide range of community groups
  • Very good with voter contact and very good manner with voters
  • Known to enjoy doing the hard yards in her electorate, and enjoy the contact with constituents
  • Would help the gender balance in caucus
  • Would not mind taking on hostile audiences of morons like teachers unions as she is known to have a hide like a rhinoceros

Disadvantages

  • An assertive woman in a world where assertiveness in women can unfairly be used to call a woman a “school marm”, “bossy” or “a bitch”
  • Former Teacher
  • Would not add to the intellectual and policy heft of the party
  • Perhaps not the best long term prospect

Simon O’Connor:

Selection Record: Stood unsuccessfully for selection in Maungakiekie in 2008.

Seen as a nice fellow, a hard working volunteer for the party over the years, but not considered a rising star. O’Connor used to be a priest in training, but mysteriously left the seminary with his studies uncompleted. However, his Catholic connections will probably be popular in Tamaki. He is unmarried, so may be seen as less than settled as a choice for a conservative seat like that. Has not been a seat candidate for National before, was unsuccessful as a local board candidate for the Waitemata ward in 2010. He is a Contracts Manager for Southern Cross Health Society

The selection in Maungakiekie in 2008 was marked by extreme unethical behaviour, with O’Connor and the electorate chair trying to stack selection in O’Connor’s favour against Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga. O’Connor then went on the offensive to attack Sam on the grounds he was a councillor and could not campaign properly due to his council responsibilities. Like Brent Robinson in Rodney, O’Connor lost.

What is it with fundies and unethical selection campaigns? Maybe we need to get candidates to swear on the bible they will not be unethical during selection.

Advantages

  • None

Disadvantages

  • Unethical selection campaign in 2008 means he will never receive a positive comments from this blog.

Seby Reeves:

Selection Record: None

I have never heard of him, but who is reputedly an early 30-something lawyer, is unlikely to have upset anyone, and so could become everyone’s second choice because he hasn’t done enough to cause people to vote against him. It is unconfirmed if he has a strong party connection. He is the son of Graeme Reeves.

Advantages

  • No previous negative form in National, meaning if he presents well, works the delegate list hard and delivers the best speech on the night he has a chance.
  • People will not have formed an opinion of him, so he has a chance to convince them to vote for him in a weak field.

Disadvantages

  • Unknown in National
  • Looks like an opportunist.

Mark Thomas:

Selection Record: Successful Wellington Central 1996. (Bolger shafted him so Prebble could win the seat).

Current Orakei Board member, with a reputation for talking but not walking. Thomas has a number of negatives causing political risk to National. His work as PR stooge for Mark Hotchin would be poison to locals and a bright shiny bullseye for Labour. Thomas is unmarried with children, which won’t be popular with locals either. His becoming an MP would also trigger an expensive by-election for Auckland ratepayers, or potentially cause another round of double-dipping accusations like Sam Lotu-iiga went through. Famously knifed by Bolger in Wellington Central in 1996. Comes across as a bit effeminate.

Advantages

  • Of the known candidates Mark is the most talented and has done more good for the National Party
  • Sound strategic and political mind, and a good backroom operator
  • Will present well and speak well, with a very clear, logical message

Disadvantages

  • Too close to party president Peter Goodfellow, who has no support in Tamaki
  • Good talker, not such a good walker
  • PR man for Mark Hotchin, which will be used against him
  • To intellectual to be really liked by middle New Zealand and not great at pressing the flesh
  • Not a retail politician
  • Unfairly blamed for Melissa Lees campaign debacle, rather than being credited for the highly successful campaign for Sam Lotu-Iiga in Maungakiekie in 2008

A note for readers: The tip line has been running hot with all sorts of stories about marriage, sexuality and other personal details. I do not believe these points deserve public airing, and I also do not believe they will be factors in selection. In 1976 Marilyn Waring was outed by the Truth, but remained in parliament until 1984, with the provincial New Zealand seats of Raglan and Waipa accepting her for who she was rather than being all preachy and judgmental.

Tamaki Nominations for National

from National party press release:

The National Party has announced a shortlist of five top nominees who have put their names forward for selection as National’s Tamaki candidate in the November 26 election.

A shortened candidate selection process is taking place after the decision by Tamaki MP Allan Peachey to step down at the election.  Tamaki’s pre-selection committee met last night, while a final selection will take place on October 26.

Tamaki Electorate chair Andrew Hunt says the candidates are:

  • Denise Krum
  • Toni Millar
  • Simon O’Connor
  • Seby Reeves
  • Mark Thomas

As with all selections this blog does not take a position on who should win the selection, as delegates are smart enough to choose the best candidate most of the time.  A full profile of all candidates will be posted tomorrow.

This selection is being run very fairly, unlike others this cycle. Board members and regional chairs are not involved promoting candidates, in total breach of the ethics of their position, a position that requires complete neutrality.