McCarten on a National Cabinet
Matt McCarten looks at a possible National Cabinet. His picks are:
- John Key – PM
- Bill English – Deputy PM, Finance
- Gerry Brownlee – Leader of the House, SOEs, State Services
- Simon Power – Justice, Attorney-General
- Judith Collins – Welfare
- Tony Ryall – Health
- Nick Smith – Environment, Conservation
- Maurice Williamson – Transport
- Peter Dunne – Revenue
- Rodney Hide – Education
- Murray McCully – Foreign Affairs
- Lockwood Smith – Overseas Trade, Associate Finance
- David Carter – Agriculture
- Anne Tolley – Education if Hide does not get it
- Wayne Mapp – Defence and Industrial Relations
Matt gets some things wrong. He claims Simon Power will get Justice and AG as there are no other lawyers on the front bench. As Judith Collins was President of the Auckland District Law Society we can assume she is a lawyer.
Matt also says half the people were in the previous 1996 to 1999 Cabinet. Actually only seven out of the 15 were, but more to the point he has overlooked near certs for Cabinet such as Chris Finlayson and Tim Groser. Pansy Wong has an excellent chance also.
No TweetBacks yet. (Be the first to Tweet this post)
Tags: Matt McCarten, National
September 14th, 2008 at 10:34 am
Peter Dunne??? Yeech. Hope not. Labour supporting pontificating hypocritical creep. ..and Nick Smith can piss off too. Global warming nutter.
September 14th, 2008 at 10:39 am
McCarten has no interest in getting it right.
Finlayson for AG in my view
Groser will get Trade and I think John Key is on record that Groser will get Trade, I heard say this at a meeting at the Wellington Chamber of Commerce
September 14th, 2008 at 10:44 am
Education for Hide? Interesting choice (though one I would love to happen). I would have thought conventional wisdom would be he gets Commerce and Associate Finance.
Yes Farrar, odd he has missed Finlayson – I think he’d make an excellent AG.
September 14th, 2008 at 10:47 am
Does this mean that Matt McC thinks the election result is a foregone conclusion?
Re his actual list No’s 1-5 I have no problem with, 6-9 I’m not so sure about. Smith and Williamson no thanks, Ryall maybe ok but I need convincing. I would make Hide the Revenue Minister and perhaps an associate minister of finance or SOE’s. Finlayson would be my AG and Groser has to involved in the trade area because of his expertise.
He forgot to list the Energy portfolio, perhaps Brownlee?
September 14th, 2008 at 10:48 am
Hide in Education!? McCarten must be assuming a lot more ACT MPs than they currently have…
Would’ve thought ACT will have to take whatever National deigns to give them – where the hell else are they going to go?! Brash would’ve gone with ACT whether he needed to or not (or would’ve wanted to), seeing as he was an ACT guy in National clothing, but dont know if Key swings that way or not…?
September 14th, 2008 at 10:50 am
Oh and another thing – why on earth would Peter Dunne be ahead of Rodney Hide in the Cabinet rankings?
You’d have to assume ACT will bring in more MPs, and add to that the fact that they have never held up a decaying Labour Government.
September 14th, 2008 at 10:55 am
Judith Collins … Welfare and Veterans’ Affairs. She has done more for Vietnam veterans than all other politicians combined.
September 14th, 2008 at 10:56 am
Didn’t know there were rankings beyond PM and Deputy PM in cabinet Vinick..? Does it matter if Dunne is ‘below’ Hide – they’d still have the same portfolios…
September 14th, 2008 at 10:56 am
DPF: “Matt gets some things wrong… Matt says half the people were in the previous 1996 to 1999 Cabinet. Actually only seven out of the 15 were”
Half of 15 is seven point five
I guess you’re right then, eh? Or is Matt only half wrong?
September 14th, 2008 at 10:57 am
Stephen said-
“Would’ve thought ACT will have to take whatever National deigns to give them – where the hell else are they going to go”
Well, not into Cabinet for one thing. I spoke to one of Heather Roy’s doorknocking team a couple of weeks ago who said they may not go into Cabinet, and may just offer up confidence and supply on a vote-by-vote basis. Reckons that could be a better way of staying out of the Government, but getting policy wins (not necessarily a view I agree with I should point out).
September 14th, 2008 at 11:03 am
“Judith Collins … Welfare and Veterans’ Affairs.”
PM even…
September 14th, 2008 at 11:04 am
I have to say that if that is the National cabinet I would be a little disappointed.
Maurice Williamson is certainly a candidate for the back benchers.Look how he spat the dummy with Bill English.
The rest look somewhat like retreads, too many of the 90′s group.
To me, add people like Chris Finlayson(Outstanding),Tim Grocer,Chester Borrows,Pansy Wong and Jonathon Coleman. They have performed well. Grocer must be Trade Minister. He has been at the forefront of WTO negotiations.
I believe that National must have a Maori in cabinet- Georgina Te Heu Heu or Tau Henare.
Hide and Dunne must be there. Hide somewhere in the Finance area while I think Dunne should be in the local government area
September 14th, 2008 at 11:12 am
A quick revision. Is Georgina Te Heu Heu standing again ? She is a delightful lady who can work across party lines.
September 14th, 2008 at 11:18 am
I think that Attorney General will be Chris Finlayson. None of the other lawyers in the National Caucus have the intellectual horse power that the position requires.
I also think Tim Grosser will be Minister of Foriegn Affairs, and Trade as well.
September 14th, 2008 at 11:20 am
A major cabinet post in the making – infrastructure – was left off the map, here.
September 14th, 2008 at 11:29 am
“I believe that National must have a Maori in cabinet”
Why? Are you a racist??
September 14th, 2008 at 11:31 am
Collins out, Lindsay Mitchell in. Rodney to Deputy. Wayne Mapp out, me in.
Carry on.
September 14th, 2008 at 11:39 am
National may have many Maori Ministers – but they will be there on talent. Georgina te Heuheu, Tau Henare, Paula Bennett and Hekia Parata could all serve as Ministers if National wins the election. And one might not have to wait too long for Paul Quinn and Simon Bridges to be ready to take the step up.
September 14th, 2008 at 12:48 pm
Vinick “Education for Hide? Interesting choice (though one I would love to happen).”
I have seen him express a desire for Associate Education, although I’m sure if he offered the full portfilio he would take it.
September 14th, 2008 at 12:57 pm
and..fair comment on collins/national..?
“..5. Judith Collins
Welfare.
She comes right out of the Richardson/Shipley mindset.
Solo mothers and those who can’t work look out.
The Nats seem to get off whacking the poor..
..and it seems a Key government isn’t going to be much different..”
phil(whoar.co.nz)
September 14th, 2008 at 1:07 pm
and this..
“..Some of you will have already picked up on the fact that well over half of this lot were in Shipley’s government..
..and most of the front bench were in the Bolger/Richardson administration before that.
Hardly “change for the future”, as Key claims, is it?
The line-up looks suspiciously like the same old gang we dumped nine years ago..”
yep..!
phil(whoar.co.nz)
September 14th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Hide would surely have to be Revenue Minister (assuming Act negotiate for Cabinet positions. As others have pointed out, they may not). He’s the only MP I’m aware of who has tried to reign in a Department that is clearly out of control in the way it treats it’s employers (the public of NZ).
Come to think of it, on that basis I’d also nominate him for Minister of Police.
But then again, Matt McCarten’s predictions for a National Cabinet line-up have all the value of a VRWC pick for a re-elected Labour one, which would probably plump for Judith Tizard as PM with Winston as Deputy.
If they really have to give Mr Quiff a BMW, then I’d suggest… I dunno… Minister of State. That pays him the perks he’s so greedy for, and gives him nothing to do. While it wastes our money, it at least makes sure he can’t make a dog’s breakfast of a portfolio.
September 14th, 2008 at 3:37 pm
Rodney in charge of the IRD would be the final glorious chapter of the ‘We’re Here to Help’ saga.
If he could get education it would make the whole ACT struggle worthwhile. But can you really see National giving him that prize?
Give Bill English education and Roger Douglas finance, and let Rodney loose on the Inland Revenue!
Party vote ACT in sufficient numbers and all this can be yours.
September 14th, 2008 at 4:35 pm
“If he could get education it would make the whole ACT struggle worthwhile. ”
But then you say you’d like to give English Education? Seems like you think Rodney getting Revenue would make the whole ACT struggle worthwile…
September 14th, 2008 at 4:48 pm
I think John was saying that in the context of getting Roger as Finance Minister, which for an ACT supporter you would have to suspect would be an excellent result.
And yes Stephen, to answer your earlier question – Cabinet is ranked.
September 15th, 2008 at 8:28 am
Well blow me down.
September 15th, 2008 at 9:38 am
The list is fairly vanilla. How about something a little more lateral? Nats and ACT are both talking reduction of government spending. One way to lead that out of the starting gates is to reduce the size of Cabinet through consolidation of portfolio areas. For instance, I hear National Security being talked about more and more as a coherent whole of Govt approach to defence, police, customs etc. It’s what our allies are already doing. So it is conceivable that Nats could have a Minister of National Security in Cabinet supported by associates or under-secretaries and, in this particular scenario it’s likely that Heather Roy could hold Defence (being the only opposition spokesman on the subject that’s taken seriously by the media). Ditto logic could be applied to all core functions of State which allows for minor parties and up & coming Nat backbenchers to be included, without replicating Clark’s largesse machine inside the executive.
September 15th, 2008 at 12:39 pm
Peter Dunne! I seriously hope not. That brown-noser will be out of the picture…hopefully, c’mon Ohariu-Belmont (whereever that is!) people, ditch this clown.
September 15th, 2008 at 5:34 pm
Hide with Education over Tolley? Yeah right! Like that’ll happen! And especially with the demotion of Tolley to 14, if anything, she’ll hold her position at 10. She’s an extremely effective National spokesperson – considerate, compassionate and a straight-talker. Especially as she is a relatively fresh face to the National frontbench over the likes of McCully, L. Smith and Williamson. We can expect great things from Tolley. It’d be an interesting mix if Williamson was demoted back to the midbenches and either Findlayson or Groser was promoted – encouraging the idea of diversity especially with Findlayson. With Groser on the front bench, it would be obvious that Trade is a big part of a National Govt, but with Findlayson, there would be better bang-for-your-buck as he would be Attorney General, Arts Culture Heritage and Treaty Negotiations Minister, showing a greater appeal to middle voters, as well as him being gay. Diversity plus! Hide would most likely be more effective in portfolios like Economic Development, SOE’s or Commerce, not Education. Or even State Services, he’d be able to restore neutrality and fight off corruption in that portfolio! Education is too much of an integral part of National’s agenda to be given away in coalition deals. Dunne in Revenue and/or Industrial Relations would be effective for the “nice man with the wavy hair”.
September 16th, 2008 at 10:00 am
Surely, if the Nats actually need Dunne’s one seat, the easiest way to have that and free up useful space in the Cabinet would be to make him Speaker?
September 17th, 2008 at 5:26 pm
Also, funny how M-M-M-Matt McCarten said that quote “Katherine Rich and Georgina te Heuheu are out”…another flaw in his argument as te Heuheu is still “in”.