The Dim-Post

February 2, 2011

Quote of the day, it’s come to this edition

Filed under: Politics — danylmc @ 1:03 pm

‘If Winston Peters holds the balance of power it will be a Phil Goff led government.’ – John Key.

This isn’t a chance remark. Goff’s brand is now so damaged the National Party can use Labour’s leader as a negative quality with which to attack his party.

About these ads

58 Comments »

  1. So is Key saying he’ll have a tanty and cause a second election rather than work with whatever result the people of New Zealand deliver? I have to agree, lately Key has been demonstrating the early signs of gloating meglomania.

    Comment by Sanctuary — February 2, 2011 @ 1:10 pm

  2. Its kinda like comparing Stalin and Hitler (well not really) but Key still thinks its fine to deal with Rodney Hide??

    Comment by max — February 2, 2011 @ 1:12 pm

  3. This is bad for Winston Peters

    Comment by Neil — February 2, 2011 @ 1:12 pm

  4. You are a National MP. You are in Cabinet, or aspiring. After 6 pm on November 26, please rank the following:

    1. Winston Peters
    2. Hone Harawira
    3. Opposition

    No recount needed. Winston wins on the first ballot.

    Comment by sammy — February 2, 2011 @ 1:14 pm

  5. Anybody remember Mis Clarks sneering at John Key last election
    “Wait till it matters”
    Well now we know
    Good to see some real integrity regarding the Winston problem

    Comment by Raymond A Francis — February 2, 2011 @ 1:20 pm

  6. Well Max that really depends if you’re an immigrant or not doesn’t it. Given that they do support Labour to a large degree Goff is going to have an interesting time explaining any kind of coalition deal to them.

    Comment by JD — February 2, 2011 @ 1:21 pm

  7. @Raymond

    Either you’re very naive, or you think we are.

    It’s a tactic. Not a principle. You do know the difference?

    Comment by sammy — February 2, 2011 @ 1:29 pm

  8. Actually, to most of you above, when Key ruled out working with WP in 2008, it was ultimately a positive move, because any other time WP was involved in a coalition, he made life difficult. You are assuming that Key wants power at any cost. I think he has been showing us that he is different. Whether that is good or bad is another matter.

    For example, he simply announced the decision on the election date, something that in the past was a closely held secret until much closer to the election. He really does behave differently. He wants to be PM but not at any price, it would seem. And he has been quite upfront about it.

    Comment by David in Chch — February 2, 2011 @ 1:30 pm

  9. “…Good to see some real integrity regarding the Winston problem…”

    Problem? Problem? Damn those ignorant voters electing people that are not approved by right thinking people!

    Since when has the decisions of the voters been characterised as a “problem”? Rank middle class arrogance much? Just because he offends your delicate sensibilities doesn’t make him a problem, you bozo.

    Comment by Sanctuary — February 2, 2011 @ 1:30 pm

  10. Big Key is standing someone in epsom too. What does that mean?

    Comment by k.jones — February 2, 2011 @ 1:35 pm

  11. Sanctuary – yes it is meglomania to say I’d rather surrender power than deal with someone whom I can’t trust. Not. Try the exact opposite. The meglomaniac is the person who would do anything to hold onto power.

    There is no second election if Winston holds the balance of power. As Key said, then Phil Goff will become the Prime Minister.

    Comment by David Farrar — February 2, 2011 @ 1:39 pm

  12. For example, he simply announced the decision on the election date, something that in the past was a closely held secret until much closer to the election. He really does behave differently. He wants to be PM but not at any price, it would seem. And he has been quite upfront about it.

    err, he didn’t ‘simply announce’ it, he had a special surprise press conference announcing his unprecedented move of announcing an election so early.

    I YWND.

    Comment by Pascal's bookie — February 2, 2011 @ 1:44 pm

  13. @DPF

    That’s the Key spin. Obviously. The reality (as you well know) is that the National caucus would have other ideas. And they have the final say.

    Comment by sammy — February 2, 2011 @ 1:45 pm

  14. I doubt there is an MP in National who wants to experience the horror of trying to govern with Winston again. Remember they have tried it twice before.

    National would self-destruct if it did a deal with Winston after explicitly ruling him out. No one seriously thinks that would happen.

    Comment by David Farrar — February 2, 2011 @ 1:51 pm

  15. I’d actually like to see more of this kind of thing in MMP campaigning – we elect our representatives to represent our view in Parliament and I think that needs better/clearer statements around how they will position with other members of Parliament and what their break points will be in any negotiation. It’s a bit drastic to completely rule out working with a given representative but at least we know where we stand and can vote accordingly.

    Comment by garethw — February 2, 2011 @ 1:53 pm

  16. Also, Key is so far ahead of Labour that ruling Peters out is a pretty safe bet. It’s easy to be principled when your opponents pose no credible threat.

    Comment by danylmc — February 2, 2011 @ 1:55 pm

  17. Although I’ll add that this particular example is much more about a calculated tactical ploy to give themselves powerful marketing messages (“a vote for Goff is a vote for Winston” and/or vice versa) than clarity in representation

    Comment by garethw — February 2, 2011 @ 1:57 pm

  18. Well that is true but you yourself were just saying yourself the other day Danyl that you doubt National will get a majority, personally if they didn’t get it last time I can;t see them getting it now, especially if the economy bottoms out again. I think the main issue is the lack of coalition partners for National. Like I said if you are going to get high and mighty, how can you keep dealing with Rodney?

    Comment by max — February 2, 2011 @ 1:59 pm

  19. What’s Rodney done?

    Comment by Gooner — February 2, 2011 @ 2:07 pm

  20. They have a coalition partner. The Maori Party sans Harawira. All it’ll cost them a couple of hundred million diverted from MSD to Whanau Ora, a cabinet position for Flavell and a knighthood for Sharples.

    Comment by danylmc — February 2, 2011 @ 2:08 pm

  21. “What’s Rodney done?”

    Ha!

    Comment by max — February 2, 2011 @ 2:08 pm

  22. Will be interesting to see how many votes that will cost them (going with the Maori party)

    Comment by max — February 2, 2011 @ 2:11 pm

  23. Can you answer the question max.

    Comment by Gooner — February 2, 2011 @ 2:13 pm

  24. So, we need to know who these putative New Zealand First MPs will be. Maybe seven or eight of them.

    My guess is: social conservatives, Sensible Sentencing Trust sympathisers, populist itch-scratchers, no time for the Maori Party or the Greens.

    And National won’t even talk to these guys? Seriously? They’re only Bob Clarkson’s cousins.

    Oh, and there’s no party-hopping law. Just dangle those baubles …

    Comment by sammy — February 2, 2011 @ 2:16 pm

  25. I’d just like to thank DPF for making such an insightful reply to Danyl’s point about how it’s easy to be principled about ruling Winston out when you don’t need him. David, some people are saying that you’ve gone into an all-time low of political hackery this election year, but I always knew you had it in you to deal with rational, civil discourse and not just lowbrow electioneering.

    Comment by Hugh — February 2, 2011 @ 2:17 pm

  26. I think this and an early announcement of the election date are ploys to deflect questions about Liz Hurley and Tony Veitch, and the Egyptian crisis – with typical middle-aged male gall*, Key is quoted today as saying that Liz Hurley should be thrilled he fancies her!

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10703662&ref=rss

    *a general observation based on my internet dating experiences

    Comment by Me Too — February 2, 2011 @ 2:30 pm

  27. Given Key’s obviously highly principled stand on Peters, how seriously can we take any claims from him that a Goff led government would be bad for the country?

    Lately he’s been going on about how terrible it would be to let labour onto the treasury benches, and how we’d all end up in the poor house and what have you, and yet, he reckons that’d be better than a Key/Peters govt. Is he lying about how abd a labour govt would be, or is he putting NZs interests below his distaste for Peters?

    Or is the whole principle thing is so much pants. Along with the ‘different sort of politician’ thing (unless you mean different as ‘better at it’), and the ‘not liking those sort of poilitical games’ thing.

    It’s all so confusing. I’m just glad he’s so straight forward and apolitical.

    Comment by Pascal's bookie — February 2, 2011 @ 2:36 pm

  28. Key is quoted today as saying that Liz Hurley should be thrilled he fancies her!
    Yes, about that . . .

    http://monkeyswithtypewriter.blogspot.com/2011/02/john-keys-dark-side.html

    Comment by Monkey Boy — February 2, 2011 @ 2:43 pm

  29. Oh, and it appears from same Herald article that Key keeps *a list*

    This is not his party political list, but his personal party party list…. I suppose it’s not OIA-able :-(

    Comment by Me Too — February 2, 2011 @ 2:47 pm

  30. Macdonald (Key’s PR Advisor from Manago Comms) said with the Rugby World Cup and election approaching, she would counsel Key to moderate the number of times he revealed his blokey side, “so that he is seen more as a capable leader; then he can let it loose again once re-elected”.

    Comment by k.jones — February 2, 2011 @ 2:50 pm

  31. “What’s Rodney done?”
    Auckland.

    Comment by GN — February 2, 2011 @ 2:53 pm

  32. As Key said, then Phil Goff will become the Prime Minister.

    Ignoring the amusing, if wholly theoretical, possibility of a minority Government due to Winston being shunned on both sides.

    The thing that’s stuck in my head was him totally not seeing any problem about talking babes with Tony Veitch. And how said babes probably love it.

    But Danyl’s point about ‘Phil-Goff led’ apparently being worse than ‘Labour-led’ is well made.

    Comment by lyndon — February 2, 2011 @ 3:00 pm

  33. Re: epsom and nat candidate announced today too: Its a hefty snub for Rodders and Act. Key does expect rodney to get in, and is using a Nat candidate to collect additional party votes like flypaper.

    Comment by k.jones — February 2, 2011 @ 3:04 pm

  34. “The thing that’s stuck in my head was him totally not seeing any problem about talking babes with Tony Veitch.”

    Yeah, how many sports jocks are there in NZ radio? A dozen? Who thought Veitchy was the best one to be associated with and why why why???

    Comment by Me Too — February 2, 2011 @ 3:13 pm

  35. “we elect our representatives to represent our view in Parliament and I think that needs better/clearer statements around how they will position with other members of Parliament and what their break points will be in any negotiation” — garethw
    Not sure I agree. I expect a party to represent my views as best it can, but I know that under a proportional system they will have to compromise.

    “[Key] is using a Nat candidate to collect additional party votes like flypaper.” — k.jones
    How does that work? The party vote will be on the ballot whether there is a Nat. candidate or not, will it not?

    Comment by Joshua — February 2, 2011 @ 4:32 pm

  36. Goff was always picked as the night watchman and has been treated as such so it’s not surprising that the prophesy has been fulfilled. This is bad news for Labour.

    Comment by leon — February 2, 2011 @ 4:42 pm

  37. @29
    this is in fact John’s invite list for when Silvio Berlusconi comes to visit for a bunga bunga party.

    Comment by amc32 — February 2, 2011 @ 4:50 pm

  38. Ruling Peter’s out in 2008 was a well-taken risk by Key, and it has paid handsome dividends for thsi current National government. But as the comments in this thread indicate, this time round Key’s in government and he has got baggage in the form of all of the ACT party. The whole holier-than-thou approach rings a bit hollow with voters when they consider Key has no problem with being in coalition with Hide and Garret.

    Comment by Sanctuary — February 2, 2011 @ 6:21 pm

  39. Key is hardly a holier than though politician howver if you consider distancing himself from idiots like Winston (and I imagine Hone and Sue) then bring on the hyperbole Sanctuary.

    Comment by leon — February 2, 2011 @ 6:59 pm

  40. It would seem from the sound bites I’ve heard that Key is only ruling out a Peters-led NZF and not NZF, as such. Is that the impression others got, or did TVNZ do a disservice to the Hon PM?

    Comment by Philoff — February 2, 2011 @ 7:16 pm

  41. This is bad news for John Key.

    He’s given the field to perhaps the most successful coalition in NZ history. A coalition with not an inch between them on campaign funds, immigrants, the Exclusive Brethren, election funding, lightbulbs, showerheads, Parliamentary inquiries, strategic voting and the Jewish American in the PM’s seat.

    JC

    Comment by JC — February 2, 2011 @ 7:22 pm

  42. Joshua – yes, the party votes are on the ballot but the “losing candidate” gets a golden opportunity to promote the party brand/party vote

    Comment by k.jones — February 2, 2011 @ 7:30 pm

  43. I guess the American PR company advising Labour has put them in crisis response/denial mode. Ask Trev Mallard on Red Alert what Labour’s position is on Winston Peters and you get your post deleted.
    Open democracy huh?

    Comment by GN — February 2, 2011 @ 8:15 pm

  44. Response: if you want asset sales, vote National or Act. If you don’t vote for anyone else. Put it all back on Key.

    Comment by aj — February 2, 2011 @ 8:27 pm

  45. Surely John Key realises that Winston’s already been there done that with various baubles, so “it will be a Winston Peters led government”.

    Winston must, by now, have reached the same position as John Key has previously, ” only interested in PM position “. Phil could take guidance from McCully, English and Brownlee.

    Comment by Bruce Hamilton — February 2, 2011 @ 8:32 pm

  46. @ k.jones
    yes, the party votes are on the ballot but the “losing candidate” gets a golden opportunity to promote the party brand/party vote

    Which is (Shock-Horror!) exactly what National has done in Epsom for every MMP election that Rodney has been the electorate MP.
    Labour’s the same in Wigram, and I’d argue both parties have treated Oh-Bel exactly the same way, at different times.

    That’s MMP for ya…

    ——

    @ aj
    if you want asset sales, vote National or Act. If you don’t vote for anyone else.

    The only people that attached to state-owned ‘Concert FM’ are already going be voting for Winston…

    Comment by Phil — February 2, 2011 @ 9:03 pm

  47. This isn’t about John Key and partial floating of state entities (which has been desired by the left and right for decades but they’ve all been too scared to do) it’s about Labour being fucking useless.

    Comment by leon — February 2, 2011 @ 9:18 pm

  48. Ask Trev Mallard on Red Alert what Labour’s position is on Winston Peters and you get your post deleted. Open democracy huh?

    I got banned – for life apparently – for suggesting that when Chris Carter was lying about Geoff Palmer that Carter was in fact lying. Didn’t go down too well with the jackboots at Red Alert.

    Carter did however eventually fall out of favour with the jackboot brigade. But for telling the truth.

    Comment by NeilM — February 2, 2011 @ 10:51 pm

  49. Leon, what is it that you would like labour to do?

    Apart from disappear,that is?

    You really are a bore.

    Comment by peterlepaysan — February 2, 2011 @ 11:03 pm

  50. Leon, what is it that you would like labour to do?

    speaking for myself, become a party that at the very least can look good in comparison to Tolley and Bennett.

    I very much doubt that will happen any time soon. After losing later this year we’ll be faced with a showdown between the left-over from Clark thuggish faction and the aspiring union faction which backed the CTU against Jackson. Some choice.

    Comment by NeilM — February 2, 2011 @ 11:16 pm

  51. I suppose no one really expects Key to know too much about history etc, especially in comparison to some one like David Shearer who lets us all know the real lesson of recent events in Egypt:

    For the first time Arabs across the region have shown that regimes can be toppled…

    http://blog.labour.org.nz/index.php/2011/02/02/bottom-up-revolution-in-the-middle-east/

    For some reason the date July 23, 1952 springs to mind.

    Comment by NeilM — February 2, 2011 @ 11:36 pm

  52. Putting aside the assumption that Goff is actually trying to lose the election, what explains how badly Labour is going?
    Until he became leader Goff was a respected political leader, well regarded across the spectrum and very highly thought-off internationally.
    Since becoming opposition leader he’s been awful. Maybe the first year could be down to adjustment. But seriously, what explains quite how bad he’s been?
    Doesn’t he have staff who should be able to help him come across as a professional?

    Comment by FirstTimeCaller — February 3, 2011 @ 12:12 am

  53. NeilM nicely illustrates why Labour are so poked, they have more interest and intellectual horsepower focused on sexy foreign affairs than the boring day to day of balancing the NZ books.

    Comment by leon — February 3, 2011 @ 6:12 am

  54. I don’t think they let Shearer look at the books this early in his career.

    Comment by StephenR — February 3, 2011 @ 7:54 am

  55. @phil – i could have sworn there have been precendents for “free runs” – like that other old Act knuckle – Prebble in wellington central (i could be wrong tho…)

    Comment by k.jones — February 3, 2011 @ 10:20 am

  56. I’m looking forward to hearing all about asset sales and what they mean to Winston Peters this year. He is good at getting airtime and using it effectively.

    Interesting that key is hinting already he wants out. Obvious he doesn’t want to become unpopular once the asset stripping starts in National’s second term. He can sneak off to Hawaii safe in anticipation of being announced at parties as ‘sir john’, much more salubrious than the hassle back home of all that having to explain to newzillindis shit.

    Comment by Alistair — February 5, 2011 @ 5:00 pm

  57. John Key flipped on GST increases, and if needed he’ll either flip on Winston, or someone like English or Simon Power will take the leadership from him.

    Let’s presume National/ACT/Peter Dunne do not have a majority, and they have three options:

    Greens
    Maori Party
    New Zealand First

    Which one do you think will be the cheapest option?

    Comment by Shannon Taurua — February 6, 2011 @ 1:22 am

  58. Er . . . the Maori Party by a massive margin.

    Comment by danylmc — February 6, 2011 @ 7:31 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. Blog at WordPress.com.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 417 other followers

%d bloggers like this: