The Dim-Post

September 25, 2009

Exit Music for a Green

Filed under: Politics — danylmc @ 11:15 am

Sue Bradford is leaving Parliament. A mixed loss to the Greens – she’s easily their most effective MP and accomplished more than many Cabinet Ministers ever do, but on the other hand she is probably the most disliked politician in the country;  she damaged the Green brand as an environmental party.

Overall I think it’s a loss to the country – Bradford advocated for people who don’t really vote, lobby or otherwise engage in the parliamentary process: abused children, Mothers in prison, minimum wage earners and the unemployed, and there’s not much of an incentive for anyone else to champion these causes. Certainly no politician is going to be stupid enough to try and address issues around our national child abuse epidemic after seeing what Bradford went through in the last two years.

Update: NZPA has a good mini-obit of Bradford up on Stuff.

About these ads

24 Comments »

  1. strange, isn’t it? an MP who’s actually worked to help out the little man, and she’s getting death threats.

    as you say: getting mums time with babies, trying to stop kids getting the bash, and getting more money for over-exploited youth.

    but apparently she deserves a bullet.

    funny old place this new zealand.

    Comment by Che Tibby — September 25, 2009 @ 11:54 am

  2. Those of us involved in the charity world may have mixed feelings about her politics, but none about her effectiveness in helping the sick and disabled.

    She and Turei listen well, take notes, tell you what realistically they can do.. and then do it.

    I wouldn’t hesitate to say that Bradford could be a great advocate and lobbyist for any number of worthy causes.. if she wants it and approaches it in a mature way.

    JC

    Comment by JC — September 25, 2009 @ 12:07 pm

  3. Greens find themselves in an interesting position now – the “big hitters” have all moved on, they seem to be reshaping more specifically around the Sustainable/Resource angle but will have to see if they have the people in Parliament to make the impact.

    Comment by GarethW — September 25, 2009 @ 12:32 pm

  4. Interestingly getting mums in prison time with their kids was unanimously voted for in Parliament. Was a good one.

    Comment by StephenR — September 25, 2009 @ 1:03 pm

  5. Actually it appears it was more the amendment bill than the original law (Corrections (Mothers with Babies) Amendment Bill). Whatever.

    Comment by StephenR — September 25, 2009 @ 1:10 pm

  6. The rednecks will be jumping for joy…..

    Comment by millsy — September 25, 2009 @ 2:46 pm

  7. “Interestingly getting mums in prison time with their kids was unanimously voted for in Parliament.”

    The other way to achieve that is for mothers to, you know, not break the law.

    Comment by radar — September 25, 2009 @ 2:47 pm

  8. The other way to achieve that is for mothers to, you know, not break the law.

    Obviously. The bill wasn’t just ‘a favour for crims’ though – check out Heather Roy’s (and/or others’) spiel:

    http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Debates/Debates/2/b/1/48HansD_20080912_00000246-Corrections-Mothers-with-Babies-Amendment.htm

    Comment by StephenR — September 25, 2009 @ 2:57 pm

  9. Yep – Sue had the guts to fight for unpopular causes – she was stopping the Brownlees, Baldocks and McVicars of the world from complete reign over our government.
    I fear for the Greens – without that iron in their backbone, will they become a politically pliable bunch of the latte-sucking, comfortably woolly-jumpered, middle-classes-with-a-conscience?

    Comment by Leopold — September 25, 2009 @ 3:06 pm

  10. “The rednecks will be jumping for joy”

    Hot dog: this one surrre is!

    Comment by Clunking Fist — September 25, 2009 @ 3:42 pm

  11. Radar – I think it is for the benefit of the kids rather than the mums

    Comment by vibenna — September 25, 2009 @ 6:52 pm

  12. Radar – I think it is for the benefit of the kids rather than the mums

    Won’t somebody please think of the children! Oh wait, we have such a person, she’s hated by half the population. That’s New Zealand for you.

    Comment by George Darroch — September 25, 2009 @ 7:58 pm

  13. Sue Bradford will be no loss. She stayed long enough to get the taxpayer-funded pension that is better than the dole and having left a legacy of division as she steals off into the night. Like any dictator wannabe she hid her intent behind any cause of convenience. Her entire life has been one of trying to turn New Zealand into her idea of a socialist paradise. Her legislation was never about the children. How many children did she save!? Better yet, how many were murdered since her great leap forward? Her weasel-words and damned lies were an affront to any thinking person. Whether or not the legislation was good will be overshadowed by the disgraceful tactics she used to promote it.

    Comment by Christopher Thomson — September 25, 2009 @ 9:29 pm

  14. Hey, Millsy, how do I know a redneck when I see one?

    Comment by Christopher Thomson — September 25, 2009 @ 9:41 pm

  15. Chris:

    Look in the mirror.

    Comment by millsy — September 25, 2009 @ 9:45 pm

  16. So, a red-neck is a Labour voter of many years who works for a Government department.

    Just as I thought – you’re a twat.

    Comment by Christopher Thomson — September 25, 2009 @ 10:07 pm

  17. A twat is anyone who makes a wild and rash generalisation against anybody whom they don’t know based on the flimsiest of evidence,; usually because they took a contradictory view to the twats’ cherished views.

    Comment by Christopher Thomson — September 25, 2009 @ 10:10 pm

  18. “A twat is anyone who makes a wild and rash generalisation against anybody whom they don’t know based on the flimsiest of evidence,; usually because they took a contradictory view to the twats’ cherished views.”

    “Like any dictator wannabe she hid her intent behind any cause of convenience. Her entire life has been one of trying to turn New Zealand into her idea of a socialist paradise. Her legislation was never about the children.”

    Comment by bradluen — September 25, 2009 @ 10:36 pm

  19. More importantly, what’s left of the (activist) left in Parliament now? Anyone besides Locke?

    Comment by bradluen — September 25, 2009 @ 10:42 pm

  20. “A twat is anyone who makes a wild and rash generalisation against anybody whom they don’t know based on the flimsiest of evidence,;”

    ridiculous suggestion! a twat is a female sex organ

    Comment by kahikatea — September 26, 2009 @ 7:07 am

  21. ignoring the mud-slinging, i heard yesterday that the babies-in-prison thing does not actually apply here in wellington (at arohata).

    can anyone confirm that this might actually be a furphy?

    Comment by Che Tibby — September 26, 2009 @ 10:06 am

  22. I don’t think anyone who was put off voting Green by Sue Bradford would ever have genuinely considered such a vote in the first place.

    Comment by Rich — September 26, 2009 @ 2:35 pm

  23. Who is going to enrage Christopher Thomson now?

    Comment by Boganette — September 27, 2009 @ 11:38 am

  24. I don’t think anyone who was put off voting Green by Sue Bradford would ever have genuinely considered such a vote in the first place.

    I was.

    Comment by Phil (not Goff) — September 28, 2009 @ 8:45 am


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

The Rubric Theme. Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 413 other followers

%d bloggers like this: