Armstrong on Goff
November 29th, 2008 at 9:11 am by David FarrarJohn Armstrong looks at the road ahead for Phil Goff:
Some on the left will view Goff’s paying homage to that most iconic of Labour figures as an insult, given the former’s support for Sir Roger Douglas free-market policies during the tumultuous years of the Lange Government.
But the Labour Party which Goff inherits from Helen Clark and Michael Cullen is one since reforged in the spirit which fuelled Savage’s Government.
The Douglas era is now history. Goff has long since operated within the Clark-Cullen social democratic frame. He and his deputy, Annette King, may be from the more moderate (arguably more right) wing of the party. But it will be a surprise if there is much change in fundamentals under their command.
While Helen Clark remains an MP, Goff will make no changes. Goff is Leader because Clark allowed him to be. At the moment all the Labour MPs can do is rave about how wonderful Helen was and try and protect her legacy. When was the last time you heard a Labour MP rave about Phil Goff and how excited they are to have him as Leader?
The problem about making no fundamental changes, is that Labour may have little to campaign on. Unless they promise tax increases there is little spare money.
Being granted the full three years to turn things around will be seen as plenty of time for him to put Labour back in a winning position. He will therefore likely get just one shot at becoming prime minister.
If he gets even that. I certainly hope he does. I regard a Phil Goff led Labour Party as far more rational and sensible than the Clark led Labour. But the overall Labour Caucus leans heavily to the left – I only count eight MPs out of 43 as belonging to the more centrist bloc. So if in a year or so Goff is making no impact in the polls, they may get restless. The lack of an acceptable replacement though may save him.
The second thing that must happen is Labour must do some serious soul-searching about why it lost the election. That debate will start with a session at next week’s meeting of the Labour caucus, the first chance the party’s MPs have had collectively to analyse the reasons why Labour became so “disconnected” from voters that its share of support slumped from just over 41 per cent of the overall party vote to just under 34 per cent.
And that is a pretty big fall. In 1999 National only dropped 4%.
Some in Labour may be inclined to ptu the loss down to time for a change. And sure that was a factor. But if they overlook their bad calls on the EFA, Winston, the pledge card, cancelling tax cuts, law & order, Section 59 – then they won’t have learnt.
Related posts:
- Armstrong on Goff
- Smart Goff
- Armstrong lashes Goff
- Goff confirms his candidacy for Leader post-election
November 29th, 2008 at 9:42 am
Labour won’t learn its lesson. Goff should boot Clark out of Parliament. She’s a spent force.
Vote:November 29th, 2008 at 9:45 am
DPF:
“……..Some in Labour may be inclined to ptu the loss down to time for a change. And sure that was a factor. But if they overlook their bad calls on the EFA, Winston, the pledge card, cancelling tax cuts, law & order, Section 59 – then they won’t have learnt……”
EXACTLY.
The Standardistas spent months before the election going yadda, yadda, about a “policy drought” from John Key; and I kept telling them to face the bloody facts; they were going to lose the election because of the few things on which Labour had defined themselves, would not back down, and would not listen to New Zealand; all John Key needed to do was promise to repeal the EFA, ban government plundering of the public purse for electioneering purposes, listen to the people on anti-smacking, review the RMA, be positive rather than negative about tax cuts, and promise to keep people like G. Burton in jail; and they would romp home, they were not going to need to offer “policies” beyond that.
Vote:November 29th, 2008 at 9:48 am
Yep, OECDRank22; but more than that, Labour needs purging, Clark and her close colleagues have spent years turning it into “the Heleban”, that is why as Mr Farrar points out, there are now only 8 possible “centrist” Labour MP’s; all the rest are Trade Union, Rainbow coalition, anti-Christian, “long march through the institutions” foot-soldiers.
Vote:November 29th, 2008 at 9:50 am
Helen Clark doesn’t have a legacy to protect.
She was a disaster for New Zealand. It’s the people who choose to remain in New Zealand that will be paying for Helen Clark’s mistakes for generations to come.
Vote:November 29th, 2008 at 9:59 am
Labour ‘Centrist’ MPs ……
Goff
King
Cunliffe???
Cosgrove
Jones
Mahuta???
Davis???
and???
[DPF: Hawkins, Robertson]
Vote:November 29th, 2008 at 10:07 am
Good point, Ross Miller, DPF is notoriously gracious when it comes to who is or is not a dangerous socialist…….
Vote:November 29th, 2008 at 10:36 am
David you forgot the underlying (pun not intended) reason for their defeat. It was their culture of lies and deceit
And yes, Labour no doubt would describe telling the truth as ‘underlying.’
Vote:November 29th, 2008 at 10:37 am
David … of course you are right with Hawkins and Robertson. Hawkins slipped my mind because he is so invisable now but to be fair he is a good electorate MP and runs the Manurewa LEC much like a NZ version of Tammany Hall while Robertson is paying the price for his moderate stance being dumped from his role as Assistant Speaker (guess that’s payback Labour style for sending your boy to King’s College).
Vote:November 29th, 2008 at 1:06 pm
The best way to “protect” Helen’s legacy would be to never speak of it again and move on. Her legacy is one retaining power at the cost of damaging the country: running the economy on hot air encapsuled within a thin film, then being surprised that it bursts. Stripping her own party of compentent members and replacing them with idiotic yesmen (or more accurately yes-women). Buying elections through bribing special interest groups and fostering anti-american feelings. From day one her plans were all about how to get power, it is apparent she had no idea how to act once she got it.
Vote:November 29th, 2008 at 1:18 pm
So H2 is still running the Liarsparty then? God help all who sail in it!
Vote:November 29th, 2008 at 1:42 pm
Every time I read Armstrong he is always spinning for Labour, I thought it was just because of his close relationship with Helen Clarke but now I see it is just his leftist leanings. Does he really believe people can not see past his spin?
Vote:November 29th, 2008 at 2:05 pm
“In talking a lot about Labour “not meeting people’s expectations”, Goff is publicly acknowledging the party made mistakes. That is what voters want to hear. Then they might start listening again to what else Labour has to say.”
Thats about as brave as Full Goof is ever about to become at criticising the sad creature that was his predecessor.
Vote:Give it two years and the EMU’s pretender to the throne will have rolled him.
Enjoy your brief time in the sun Goof.
God knows it was pathetic enough reading about how long it took you to get there.
November 29th, 2008 at 2:06 pm
ps: Isn’t Armstrong a wanker!
Vote:November 29th, 2008 at 3:43 pm
Just as National didn’t manage to grasp why they lost in ’99, Labour in ’08 doesn’t seem to get it either. “Time for a change” doesn’t cut it. For starters, that gives John Key more credit than he deserves.
Unless Labour get a bit more lasseiz faire, they are going to stay in opposition a very long time.
Vote:December 1st, 2008 at 8:57 am
My own take (For US readers) is here:
http://www.newgeography.com/
Locals might complain that I ignored the Winston effect and law and order but these issues were both two general and two specific to be of interest to US readers. And I had a word limit.
Vote: