National Party list jockeying shows the naked hunger for power
List shoo-ins 'break party ranking rules'
A move to strong-arm National Party members into guaranteeing safe list placings for sitting MPs is raising eyebrows within the wider party. It is understood an attempt to guarantee the 43 returning MPs top-50 placings was initially approved.
But that was watered down after senior members pointed to party rules requiring regional rankings for all electorate candidates. Regional selection meetings have been read a statement from party president Judy Kirk making it clear caucus rankings should be left to the leader John Key. National insiders said at party regional conferences it was being made clear that MPs should be placed at or near the top of regional lists.
Hmmmm – interesting, there seems to be a three way fight going on within National – the Caucus want more power and are taking the one off 2005 deal to give the 25 MPs the top 30 places as a given, the Party wants more say especially with the promise of Government in this years election, while the new generation of ‘moderate’ National MPs also want to tug power away from Caucus. John Key is having to balance all three desires, how will he do it?
posted by Bomber @ 7:21 am
13 comments
13 Comments:
John Key is way too desperate to win and I don't trust him after looking at National's justice policies to combat crime and violence. I think he's a typical dorky right winger and I don't like the way he sucks up to the Sensible Sentencing Trust - a thinly veiled white supremacist organisation. John Key will fade into the sunset when he loses this year's election.
If you knew anything about "Sensible" Sentencing Trust then you would know that they are in bed with Family First and their extreme right wing position is very closely linked to white supremacist ideology. They hate Helengrad and socialism so I guess that makes you the fucking flake aye!
I hate SST because they have taken attention away from the real support groups and if John Key supports them, then he can go to HELLengrad for all I care.
Man Bomber, it must be tough trying to keep your focus on National while so studiously ignore bullshit like this:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominionpost/4525478a6000.html
You know you be telling us the world was about to end if this was happening to the national party, how do you manage to keep quiet about Labour's corruption?
The animals that support John Key should be sterilised so they don't pass their trash genes on to the next generation.
...
Anon 1:53pm - what are you talking about - this has already been blogged here weeks ago - keep up mate....
Labour's hand-picked female academics: appointments with disaster
At the risk of journalism I wrote a post, Labour's home to Dr Cock-up, in 2005:
This is a tale of two chicks. They both happen to have doctorates, been placed in charge of putting practical matters right by this Labour government after major policy and preventive failure, have done a monumentally incompetent job, and both been quietly moved sideways after achieving next to nothing and squandering millions.
In both cases Government Ministers refused to replace them despite almost universal condemnation of their "work" until they decided it was time to shuffle off to another bureaucratic position. In all the abstract mutterings about policies, frameworks and procedures no one seems to be apportioning blame squarely on the people responsible for these quite blatant cases of reckless incompetence and gross mismanagement.
I was referring to:
COCK-UP No.1: Dr Lisa Ferguson/Leaky homes
COST: $52m to date
INCOMPETENCE: Nov.2002 to resignation July 2005 only resolved 344 out of 3,300 claims whilst staff partied and owners fumed.
and:
COCK-UP No.2: Dr Ruth Frampton/Painted Apple Moth
COST: $50m to date, $50m over next 2 years
INCOMPETENCE: May 1999 to resignation in May 2002 let moth spread from 1kmsq that would have cost a few million to half of Western Auckland costing $100m and aerial spraying tens of thousands of people.
My best guess is that female academics were being groomed - as a political measure - for senior executive roles and subsequently were appointed to operational and management positions well beyond their ability and well outside their comfort zone as researchers and policy boffins. This has resulted in some very poor decisions and very expensive ones at that. These women were then allowed to exit on good terms - totally at odds with their apalling performance.
And now it is happening again. Suggestions that the PM's No.2, Heather Simpson, may have been involved in this latest appointment with disaster is unsurprising. So please welcome to the Hall of Mismanagement:
Dr Mary Anne Thompson: She gained an MA in international policy economics from Victoria University and a PhD from the London School of Economics... Under the current Labour government she was director of the policy advisory group in the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, later becoming the department's acting chief executive... she was announced as the new Labour Department deputy secretary in charge of the immigration division in late 2004.
At first, one senior department insider says, it was assumed that she was untouchable because of her links to Prime Minister Helen Clark, but then another story circulated that in fact Clark wanted Thompson out of her office because she did not get on with Clark's chief of staff, Heather Simpson. - SST
I don't need to quote much here - just read the well investigated SST article - it appears she has mis-used her position to gain residency for relations. Her other practices that upset staff to one side; this woman has made some seriously poor judgements... and it appears as though she has been let off the hook by Justice secretary David Oughton.
To be clear I am not insinuating that females with PhDs with research and policy backgrounds will always make bad senior executives, but there seems to be a crop of them under this Labour government who seem to land these roles without demonstrating much experience. The same sort of political considerations that groomed a tainted Clint Rickards for the Police Commissionership on the basis of ethnicity, that has a non-sworn Deputy Commissioner there on the basis of gender, is the same sort of connivance that gives affirmative action a bad name - when the people pulling the strings accept lower standard candidates.
One could speculate too, that being in the PMs department and around the sort of people who are used to routinely manipulating and subverting civil service advice and appointments has bred a culture whereby an official, like Thompson, would think nothing of personally intervening. Indeed when the PM acknowledged her own art forgery she just blithely remarked that everyone does it.
And one could speculate too, that because most of the characters in the Thompson saga are female that it may be certain female characteristics that can explain the situation, or at least might be better understood through a female perspective: individually and in terms of group dynamics and behaviour. I'm sure it is true, but to what extent and in what ways I do not know. I mean that in the same way that male characteristics have formed most of how organisations behave and what men consider appropriate and inappropriate in inter-personal relationships and their ideas on how things are organised have hitherto dominated the culture which women have had to fit themselves into. Now this is changing.
What about National's latest attact on democracy and worker's rights, taking the EPMU to court.
You do know that Mary Anne Thompson resigned yesterday, don't you Bomber?
And that she is now being investigated by the police?
The animals that support John Key should be sterilised so they don't pass their trash genes on to the next generation.
Better get another new name Travellev/Helengrad.
You've totally fucked those two.
Hey, how about Hated by Most2?
What about National's latest attact on democracy and worker's rights, taking the EPMU to court.
Fuck man, sometimes I'm sure this blog is some sort of weird Art school project. People can't be this unbelievably stupid without thinking about it first,
could they?
"People can't be this unbelievably stupid without thinking about it first" Um what about you Legio?
Sometimes I think you're some sort of weird and very persistent satirist. Your opinions are so absurd, one would have to think you were being satirical. You're so angry and derisive of other people and your arguments are farcical, either your joke's gone on too long or you've got some serious issues. Just give up Legio on your joke or if your serious, on this blog. Without you maybe some proper discussion of these issues can take place.
Either helengrad is szichophrenic, or somebody is using her handle, because her posts are all over the place.
Either way, she is taking the piss.
What about National's latest attact on democracy and worker's rights, taking the EPMU to court.
Fuck man, sometimes I'm sure this blog is some sort of weird Art school project. People can't be this unbelievably stupid without thinking about it first...
What is your argument legio, do you have any point to make about how it's not an attact on democracy? Or are you just trying to insult people again. Try to have a point beyond just throwing insults. Maybe it's that your stance on matters is so indefensible by any sensible arguments that you have to just insult people instead. I mean do you ever have a cogent point to make?
I love infestigate magazine and watching home and away and police tenseven and I am voting for the national party this yeer.
"...and I am voting for the national party this yeer."
Join the club, so is most of NZ.
Post a Comment
<< Home