Goff confirms his candidacy for Leader post-election
May 20th, 2008 at 11:02 am by David FarrarBen Thomas from NBR reports that Phil Goff has confirmed that he will be a contender for the Labour Party leadership if Helen Clark stands aside, if they lose Government.
Mr Goff made the comments in an interview with Oliver Driver for the Alt TV show Let’s Be Frank two weeks ago. The interview will air tonight at 8.30 pm.
Trade minister Mr Goff said he would look at the leadership in the event of an election loss “If I felt that I was the best one [candidate] in that position and that Helen had stood aside voluntarily.” …
The comments are pragmatic, even banal, and reflect recent polling. But it is rare for a government minister to depart from the strong media lines out of the Beehive that polling under-represents government support. …
When asked earlier in the interview whether he was the leader in waiting Mr Goff said “I don’t know – that’s a decision made by caucus.”
Asked by Mr Driver if leadership was an ambition, Mr Goff responded “It’s not an overwhelming ambition.”
“I like the job I do. I’ve done it for the best part of 25 years. That’s been a very long sentence, that one.”
Did Phil Goff just say something along the lines of just being happy being the MP for Mt Roskill?
Related posts:
- Papers on Goff
- Goff vs Cunliffe
- Pellett calls on Goff to resign as Labour Leader
- Labour’s new lineup
May 20th, 2008 at 11:18 am
“It’s not an overwhelming ambition.”
I guess the thought of being leader of the opposition for the rest of his days and then probably retiring with a knive in his back, is not exactly the glorious pinacle to his career that he had planned.
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 11:23 am
Looks like Goff just admitted the split within the Labour party is so bad it doesn’t matter if everyone knows it. The wonderful thing is that the polarisation of internal politics will be as idiotic and as entrenched as their public positions and they’ll take years to reform. Game over.
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 11:33 am
I not sure Goff would know what he was putting his hand up to lead.
The Labour party of my parent’s generation is long dead.
The current Labour party is rudderless and has a puddle-deep talent pool as a result of Helen’s totally domineering modus operandi.
In a decade of two a new ‘workers party’ may rise from the ashes. There many be leaders willing to pin their personal brand to such a party at that time.
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 11:37 am
He might have to be Leader as he might be the only MP they have left after the election at this rate…
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 11:42 am
Not only are the rats leaving the sinking ship, we are now getting the fight over who will be captain of the lifeboat!
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 11:56 am
And theres the stake through the heart.
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 12:07 pm
I am completely surprised by this. It is one thing for a politician to indicate a leadership ambition at some fairly distant future time, but not when the politician’s party is gearing up for an election and the party needs to have a display of total unity.
He is effectively implying that Labour is going to lose the election, Helen will be under pressure to step down (or be rolled) and he is the shiny knight in armour who will wear the leadership mantle and rout those dreadful Nats in 2011.
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 12:11 pm
Tony Blair was elected to parliament in 1983. He has been PM and retired.
George Bush was elected Governor of Texas in 1995. He’ll be retiring from a different job early next year.
Barack Obama was elected to Congress in 2005. Hillary Clinton in 2001. John McCain in 1983.
Phil Goff was elected to parliament in 1981. And he is contemplating a run for PM in 2011? He’s like one of those French politicians who refuses to die or retire, long after they’ve turned stale. Sort of political zombies… you need to decapitate them before they stop following you around groaning.
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 12:16 pm
This is either a strategic move or a big big blunder. Helen will emasculate him if its a blunder.
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
Goffy’s been around long enough to know when the writings on the wall. I’ll take it as a vote of no confidence in Labours future for 2008. Who else in in Goffs’ camp?
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
Good luck winning elections Goff when photos of you holding hands with terrorist Arafat surface.
He is hoping if he is Labour leader he will be immune from prosecution for corruption… nice try Phil.
I too hope that one day a true worker’s party dedicated to low taxes, christianity and flexibility in employment, like the Labour of my parent’s generation, will arise.
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
I doubt if Chris Carter and his partner will get an invite to a BBQ at Phil’s
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 1:10 pm
So the knives are being sharpened in Phil’s outdoor entertainment area as the steaks sizzle on the BBQ eh? Newstalk has just carried the story on the 1pm bulletin that Clark has Goff’s “100% support”, and we all know what THAT means! Perhaps the A-G will find something in his travels through Immigration that dents Phil’s ambitions.
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 1:11 pm
If Helen even blinks at him shes toast and she knows it.
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 1:28 pm
No no, you’ve got it all wrong. All this talk about knives in people’s backs. You’re thinking of the National party there…
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
I2
Perhaps he has already found something that sticks to the teflon coat of dear leader….
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
burt – we can only hope!!
Meanwhile, I have several teflon pots and pans at home, and after a few years, the coating comes off, bit by bit. Imagine what one would be like after nine years – nothing like the bright, shining, flawless article in the advertising, if you get my drift!
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
It seems to me that many are saying that Labour has changed. My reading of New Zealand history is that nothing has happened to Labour under Helen Clark- the managerial style that we are seeing is what it has always been since she took over. And it hasn’t ‘gone wrong’ – Labour has since after Lange been dependent on a level of popular support derived from a promise to spread the largesse and economic benefits of Lange era reforms, while trying to avoid stating the exact nature of the social changes that they wish to make.
Vote:Essentially what we are now seeing is the inevitable outcome of a Labour government which practised basically sound economic doctrine without understanding the nuances thereof being faced with a real crisis. Until now Labour has been able to claim credit for an increasing economy and declining unemployment without having to face up to the extent to which such was achieved by factors common to the global economy, and thereby was able to shout down those who pointed out that things could be better, but now the global down-turn has come and Labour is trying to explain where the surpluses went, why tax cuts were a bad idea but are now good, and so on.
May 20th, 2008 at 2:39 pm
I guess Goff is a fan of Clarence Darrow, who once said “Lost causes are the only ones worth fighting for”.
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 2:39 pm
This is a remarkable revelation.
The Labour Party, once guaranteed my vote in perpetuity, appears to be committing suicide. I suspect this is due, in part, to the contradictions within it: a welfare state gone mad, parental responsibility fast being eroded by the State, men marrying men, ‘middle-income’ earners entitled to benefits, a cabinet of louts and managers, etc.
The founders of the Party must be turning in their graves.
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
I am ‘goffsmacked’.
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 2:45 pm
Oh come now, kiwitoffee, you’ve been taking some of the “comment” here far too seriously.
Savage, Semple et al. may be turning in their graves, but it would be because the “third way” Blairite, soft, social democratic policies of the last 9 years or so owe more to Thatcherism than socialism. You ought to know better, given that you appear to be quite well-informed in general.
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 2:53 pm
Jafapete
Which of the criticisms I make are not based on facts?
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 2:55 pm
kiwitoffee: Just to start, “parental responsibility fast being eroded by the State”
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
I wonder if the intrepid newscaster Lisa Lewis will have a followup interview at 10pm and whether Goff will be suitably attired for the dialogue, maybe he will be motivated to invite her to replace Heather Simpson on the ninth.
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
“parental responsibility fast being eroded by the State”
jafapete ; how many family court cases and cyfs notifications last year? I suggest the figures indicate the destruction of the traditional family by the lefty twitters in favour of minority agendas, social engineering and a nanny state mentality.
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 3:12 pm
Jafa
Come on now, you are a reasonable chap for a Lefty, even you cannot deny that this corrupt govt has eroded parental responsibility.
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 3:18 pm
“Did Phil Goff just say something along the lines of just being happy being the MP for Mt Roskill?”
heh – reminds me of how shortly before Key stuck the knife into Brash’s back, he said something along the lines of … I have no plans to become leader of the National Party.
[DPF: Key never actually challenged Brash]
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 3:25 pm
D4J, What, did a Labour-led government invent the Family Court? Lets see, who was in power when it was established under the Family Courts Act 1980?
But, seriously, the point is that, even if the number of Family Court cases increased 5-fold, the vast majority of parents wouldn’t come anywhere near it. So any increase in activity there can’t be said to have any effect on the degree of parental responsibility expected from “mainstream parents”. Arguably, an increase in Family Court activity would mean that more responsible behaviour is expected of parents, surely?
That applies in particular to the anti-smacking legislation, which is what I think kiwitoffee had in mind. That little law actually requires more thoughtful and effective parenting than before. Whacking kids is all too easy.
As for minority agendas, I have a relative whose mothers are lesbians. They are model parents, who are doing an extremely good job of parenting. That consistutes an increase not an erosion of parental responsibility on my book.
PS, Baxter, Not sure that would work. You know how lax the public service is at checking qualifications.
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
Jaffa – so you think it’s ok to prosecute a father for flicking his pre school children around the ear to stop them playing ckicken with a bus while mounted on their tricycles? Oh that’s right, the radical feminist agenda is all finished now and Mr Gaff will fix a damaged society caused through wholesale family breakdown and fatherlessness. Nice to hear about your dyke friends. Oh please. What the hell.
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
Jafapete
I don’t read many of the comments, at least those that go before any that I make! And thanks for the faint praise.
Anyway, just to start, I think most parents feel that the State interfers increasingly in family matters. The whole tenor of the Labour-led government is anti-family: a sort of ‘CYPS and the Family Court know best’ attitude. This is hardly surprising when you look at the people in positions of leadership and influence in it. People like Mses. Clark, Street, that woman from the Greens and Mr Barnett, to name just a few, have an overbearing feminist and statist approach to the issues of raising a family about which – yes, it has to be said – they know bugger all (pardon the pun). They can barely conceal their contempt for Mum, Dad and the kids as a model for most families.
And my other criticisms of the government?
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 4:22 pm
Kiwitoffee, Thanks for your reply, as it is getting very late in your part of the world.
Can you explain how the Mses Clark, Street, Simpson, etc, exert this influence over the day-to-day activities of the Family Court and CYPS? How have the priorites of these bodies (viz., the Family Court and CYPS) changed in ways that are anti-family over the past 9 years? Has removing discrimination against some groups of people (notably gays, it would seem from your comment) really been to the disadvantage of the traditional family unit?
You may very well be correct in what you say about the nature of key government leaders, but you have to demonstrate the linkages. There would seem to be a few gaps in your argument.
In any case, as I noted above, CYPS (under whatever guise) and the Family Court are hardly new; and any increases in cases handled, etc, could be seen as continuations of already well-established trends.
I think that your other criticisms are about as well founded.
“And thanks for the faint praise.” My pleasure.
D4J: Not sure that a flick around the ear would work, and having children playing chicken with a bus is much too dangerous not to warrant a great deal more attention than that!
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 4:30 pm
‘Can you explain how the Mses Clark, Street, Simpson, etc, exert this influence over the day-to-day activities of the Family Court and CYPS?’
Yes jaffa, I can as I attended a briefing Lianne Dalziel gave to family court judges, lawyers,psychologists, counselors, court staff,cyfs senior management and lurkers when she was Associate Minister of Justice held in Christchurch. The feminist agenda was clearly spelled out and many in the room were shocked. The Ministry is Justice is tainted by radical feminists and Goff as a lawyer understands this.
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 4:40 pm
I see from Audrey Young’s blog that there have been raised voices following the disclosure of Mr Goff’s ambitions. Alt TV will get it’s biggest audience ever!
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 4:41 pm
Jafapete.
It’s not late here, it’s mid-morning.
Let’s take ‘Mr’ Barnett, for example. I saw recently on the Scoop website a photo of Mr Barnett and his partner enjoying their wedding ceremony, confetti and all if I remember rightly, shortly after the legislation allowing this sort of thing was passed. Now if that does not undermine the Mum, Dad and the kids model, then I don’t know what does.
(Mr Barnett and his ‘husband’ (or is it ‘wife’?) are about to leave NZ, according to newspaper reports).
Do you really think ‘the nature’ of the government leaders indicated does not inform their approach to policy-making?
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 4:47 pm
Why was Tim Barnett the Chairperson on the Select Committee that heard submissions regarding the Care of Children Bill?
Vote:Job done eh Tim !
May 20th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
D4J: “Yes jaffa, I can as I attended a briefing Lianne Dalziel gave to family court judges, lawyers,psychologists, counselors, court staff,cyfs senior management and lurkers when she was Associate Minister of Justice held in Christchurch. The feminist agenda was clearly spelled out and many in the room were shocked. The Ministry is Justice is tainted by radical feminists and Goff as a lawyer understands this.”
Well, I have to say I am surprised at that. I am genuinely interested. Was this reported at the time? What was the occasion? How much effect did it have if those it was intended to influence were “shocked”?
Also, Goff was never a lawyer. He did one law paper for his M.A. in politics, if I recall correctly.
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 5:07 pm
I think Mr Goff might experience a smacking at the hand of Ms Clark. Quite rightly too. He’s been a very naughty boy.
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 5:56 pm
Jaffapete
I strongly agree with the point D4J is making. Although I cant attest to the Dalziel briefing I can say the Ministry of Justice, counsellors and Cyfs do have an obvious anti male agenda.
Pick yourself up a free self-help DVD made by Min Justice called “Putting your kids First” and “Kids talk about separation” you’ll see what I mean. It’s meant to assist kids understanding separation.
This Govt DVD is an example of conditioning children into thinking “Men Bad – Women Good”. It does nothing else except blame the fathers for the children’s dilemmas.
Statistically in what comes through the FAM Court fathers may be over represented, but we know how offended some sectors get when we speak statistically, don’t we?
Vote:May 20th, 2008 at 6:07 pm
Ah. The hyenas gather. Nature is never cruel or kind. It just is. Such will be the result of the next Election.
Vote: